Jump to content

UIL rules regarding helmets


Recommended Posts

i was reading about concussions and decided to post this. not sure how many are aware. thought it was good info.

[b]UIL Makes Changes to Athletic Rules and Programs for 2012-2013 School Year

Tuesday, 05 June 2012 10:58. | Written by Lisa Tipton. | | |



The University Interscholastic League of Texas has made some new changes in the rules and programs for the 2012-2013 school year.

Below are several new things schools, athletes, coaches and administrators will need to know for the next school year’s athletic competitions.  Information is from the UIL website in an article of the Leaguer written by By Mark Cousins, Athletic Director.

Concussion Training – Every coach and athletic trainer is required by state law (TEC 38.159) to undergo two hours of training on concussions prior to Sept. 1, 2012. Information on this requirement is available on the Concussion Information page on the Health and Safety section of the UIL website. UIL has also made available a syllabus that providers of concussion education can utilize to provide statewide consistency to the training programs.
Concussion Acknowledgement Form - The UIL has created a Concussion Acknowledgement Form, which will be required for all student athletes in grades 7-12 beginning with the 2012-13 school year, as a result of the passage of HB 2038 from the 2011 legislative session.

According to section 38.155 of the Texas Education Code, "a student may not participate in an interscholastic athletic activity for a school year until both the student and the student ’s parent or guardian or another person with legal authority to make medical decisions for the student have signed a form for that school year that acknowledges receiving and reading written information that explains concussion prevention, symptoms, treatment, and oversight and that includes guidelines for safely resuming participation in an athletic activity following a concussion….." This new form is available for download on the UIL website.

Football Helmets – While we talked about this last year as information, a law was also passed regarding football helmets utilized in any high school football game. Effective for the 2012-13 school year, according to section Sec. 33.094 of the Texas Education Code:

(a) A school district may not use a football helmet that is 16 years old or older in the district's football program.

(b) A school district shall ensure that each football helmet used in the district's football program that is 10 years old or older is reconditioned at least once every two years.

(c) A school district shall maintain and make available to parents of students enrolled in the district documentation indicating the age of each football helmet used in the district's football program and the dates on which each helmet is reconditioned.[/b]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I know is we (Vidor of the STJFL.NET) are required to take a coaching certification on USAFOOTBALL.COM for tackle in the tackling division and for flag division there is a seperate certification altogether. There is a concussion course as a part of it and covers heat conditioning, stress, stroke, etc. It was good and informative my son actually took it with me and we gained a lot.

Hope this answers your question!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is also a new NCAA rule (Rules that Texas HS use) this year that says a player must sit out a play if his helmet comes off during a play (unless it was caused by penalty....another player pulling it off).

I like this rule because it is going to encourage players to have their helmets fit properly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Statistics

    45,977
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined


  • Posts

    • We'll see. I don't trust us. 
    • Starting pitching has been shaky the last few weeks due to some injuries outside of Hagen Smith.  He goes tomorrow, so y’all should be fine 
    • Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?  The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws. Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws. I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed.  That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa.  Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous? Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops! Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum   So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?  What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 
    • MODS please remove that ISD twitter link! I had no idea it would copy the whole posting. I only highlighted the portion about the venue change. Sorry about that!
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...