Logo

The Trump Card

August 30, 2013

The cardinal principles for those preparing the playing rules of school sports are these:

  1. Preserve the sound traditions of the sport.
  2. Minimize risk.
  3. Provide for orderly administration.
  4. Maintain balance between offense and defense.

These were recited frequently when I was an employee of the National Federation of State High School Associations early in my career, when I was the staff liaison to the rules committees for ice hockey, soccer, swimming & diving and volleyball. These principles have been repeated many times over many years as the filter for proposals to modify contest rules in all sports.

A serious student of playing rules has known that the high school rules – enforced by part-time officials – generally have fewer exceptions than the rules on higher levels where officials have more time and training. NFL football, for example, will have exception upon exception to general principles of rules enforcement, which high school rules makers avoid. In other words, ease of administration has been more important for the high school level than a perfect balance between offense and defense in every circumstance of the contest.

It is clear now that the rules makers on all levels – from the pros to peewees – have concluded that “player safety trumps competitive advantage.” Exactly that phrase was used by some of the nation’s highest profile sports officials and supervisors of officials at high school, college and professional levels during a panel discussion closing the National Association of Sports Officials Summit in Grand Rapids last month.

More than perfect balance between offense and defense, more than ease of administration, even more than preserving the sound traditions of the sport, the rules makers are demanding player protection. In subtle ways in some sports, and smack between the eyes in football.

Go to the MHSAA Health & Safety Page, or the Football Page for more. 

Shortsighted Reform

April 16, 2013

Our posting of March 29 (“Hit Again”), about the mistakes being made in the guise of reforming education, struck a nerve with readers.  And since then, writers with wider audiences have offered similar commentaries, including DeWayne Wickham writing for Gannett as his words appeared on LSJ.com on April 3, 2013:

“The fight against public school closings has become the new civil rights battle in this country – and rightfully so.  Faced with a billion dollar budget deficit, Chicago’s public school system is the most recent urban district to announce a massive closure of schools.  The city intends to shutter 61 elementary buildings, nearly all of them in black and Hispanic neighborhoods.

“That’s a penny-wise-and-pound-foolish decision that condemns the neighborhoods surrounding these soon-to-be-boarded-up schools to further decline.  ‘We have resources that are spread much too thin,’ Todd Babbitz, the chief transformation officer (no kidding that’s his title) of Chicago’s troubled school system, told the Chicago Tribune.  Over the next decade, school officials predict that these closings will save the school system $560 million.  But first the city will have to spend $233 million to move students into classrooms elsewhere.

“Even if the school closings actually produce savings, the damage they will produce to the neighborhoods left without public schools will be catastrophic.  While poverty and crime have decimated the population of many inner city neighborhoods, shutting down schools in those troubled areas will depopulate them even faster.  The result will be a growing expanse of urban wastelands that could well deepen the budget deficits of the cities that are closing public schools.

“Politicians and school officials must be challenged to justify their school closing decision beyond the deal making of Chicago’s City Council.  The U.S. Department of Education’s civil rights division is investigating complaints that claim the decisions of several urban school districts amount to a civil rights violation.  If the school closings don’t violate the letter of the law, they sure seem to trample upon its spirit.  For example, officials in Chicago and elsewhere should turn these school buildings into hubs for nonprofit organizations and other public services.  Why not use the empty space to house police substatations, public health clinics, recreation centers and a mayor’s station?

“School systems in Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., Detroit and Newark have announced plans to close public schools, and in every case blacks and Hispanics will bear the biggest burden of these cost-cutting measures.  These decisions signal an indifference to the damage such policy decisions will have on the neighborhoods.

“‘If we don’t make these changes, we haven’t lived up to our responsibility as adults to the children of the city of Chicago,’ Mayor Rahm Emanuel said.  That’s a pretty shortsighted analysis of a problem that will render large swaths of Chicago’s black and Hispanic neighborhoods uninhabitable education wastelands.”