Discuss

Reminders:
  • Proposal here is in it's original form as it was submitted. On this submittal each numbered item represents a separate proposal and vote with the exception of those noted as no action
  • Executive Board - Voted the following way:
    1. 0 Yes, 11 No - Board No
    2, 0 Yes, 11 No - Board No
    3. No action due to existing rule
    4. No action due to the explanation in Note 1 & 4.
    5. No action due to this being a tournament operations issue.

    Notes:
    1. NFHS rules do not currently permit reviews to include with or without the use of video devices. Even in the case of college video review penalties or lack of penalties in folkstyle are not reviewable. The board declines to support this proposal.
    2. These are tournament operations either within the Districts or the State Tournament Committee, the board has a strong desire to continue operating them the way they always have which is to let the Districts and the Committee decide on operations. If individual clubs do not like the way Districts are ran they are free to run any candidates at their District meeting that they choose who might wish to run that tournament a different way. They are also free to run any candidates for Board positions who may want to run the State tournament in a different way.
    3. Medical staff is already a rule (if an individual tournament is not following said rule then that is an issue to be brought up to the District Director in accordance with the bylaws). As a side note another proposal this year exists to strike the medical staff provision from existing bylaws since it is not being followed in many cases as it is.
    4. If a coach sees something and wishes to stop the match, they or the competitor can stop the match at any time, however if the official did not see the infraction and did not call it, then either a charged injury time is going to be assessed or the match is going to be defaulted. No rule change is needed because it already exists. Flagrant Misconducts for biting is a very specific and special situation that has very clear parameters for it that are not subject to interpretation. It does not require the use of any video devices or review because the evidence can be easily seen by the official on the mat even if they did not see the actual bite occur.
    5. This is a tournament operations issue and it would be impossible for a bylaw to exist which forces a specific number of officials in these situations. In previous years there was a referee shortage which could have caused these issues but we continue to climb in our officiating numbers, so this issue will likely work itself out going forward as long as we keep up that trend.

    This was a proposal that was never presented at last year's State Body meeting, and is now being presented for an up or down vote.

    *This proposal appears in the document: 2024 Bylaw Changes.pdf
  • 2/3rds State Body Vote is required for passage of this item.


Quote
1. Protocol for honest free review for flagrant illegal misconduct situations

2. Rotate the teams that get to help set up districts

3. Medical staff at events

4. Protocol for if a coach sees an illegal or legal action that can/is causing potentially permanent and or serious injury to an athlete and the referee is not stopping the match NFHSA rule

5. More referees at events, or events spread over more time so that referees have breaks

Clear delineation between illegal and flagrant actions

  • State board members being allowed to coach is not good policy as this creates an imbalance of power
  • The referees at the District 3 tournament did not have sufficient breaks/rotations. Based on conversations with others we believe this is due to several factors, too many wrestlers registered in relation to the amount of time planned for the tournament, too late of notice to the officiating staff that more officials were needed.
  • Unclear protocol for when a coach believes an athlete is being hurt by an illegal or legal action during a match but the referee is not stopping the match.
  • No medical staff or procedures in place to address medical issues as they arose.
  • No procedure/protocol ;n place to address what penalties are enacted when ;njuries that have no physical/visible evidence like a concussion occured due to an uns6en illegal acton. In contrast with procedures/protocols in place that did address what penalties are enacted when injuries that do have physical/visible evidence like a bite mark occured due to an unseen illegal action .
  • Unclear dillenitation between illegal and flagrant actions.
  • Stace board member posting opinion on what happened during the match on public sice (Facebook). This creates a publically visible imbalance of power.

    Brandon Spevacek