5/23/2013 1

MIAA RULE CHANGE PROPOSALS FOR 2013-2015 The following reflects Rule Change Proposals that have been submitted as permitted in the Procedure for Requesting A Rule Change, Rule 87, page 94 of the current MIAA Handbook. Please note: Rule Change Proposals list Current Rule (as in handbook now), Proposal, and Rationale. All responding groups should review the proposals and forward their recommendations, using the attached form, to MIAA Assistant Director, Dick Baker. Although changes should not be made on the original proposals, any group may make amendments, which will be included in the report passed on to the next group in the process. The MSSADA and all MIAA Administrative Committees are welcome to act on each rule change proposal. In the section on Sport Specific Rules (rule change proposals 16-24 within this packet) MIAA sport committees and coaches’ associations should only act on general rules (rules 1-15 and 25) and rules for their own sport. Each of the below named groups, when reviewing a rule change proposal may take one of the two following actions:

• Record votes in favor and opposed to each proposal. • Recommend an amendment to the proposal with votes recorded in favor and opposed.

REVIEWING BODY ACTIONS MUST REFLECT THE ACTUAL VOTE 1. MIAA Sport Committees, MIAA Administrative Committees, and Presidents of MIAA recognized State

Sport Coaches’ Associations votes are due to the MIAA by December 1, 2012. 2. The Massachusetts Secondary School Athletic Directors Association (MSSADA) votes are due to the

MIAA by February 1, 2013. The MSSADA should not act until they have the packet that includes all earlier votes.

3. The MIAA District Athletic Committees (DAC) votes are due to the MIAA by March 1, 2013. The

DAC’s should not act until they have the packet that includes all earlier votes. 4. The MIAA Board of Directors will act upon proposals by May 15, 2013. 5. The Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Council will act upon all proposals by June 1, 2013.

5/23/2013 2

1. Page 34 Part III, Rule 36. 2: Multiple School Events: Involving Only MIAA Member Schools By: Aaron Patterson, Director of Athletics, Holyoke Public Schools Current: 36.2 Sub-varsity multi-school events are not allowed. Exception: Track, Wrestling, and Cross Country

sub-varsity multi-school meets may be considered for approval unless (1) a team champion or winner is determined, or (2) the meet is advertised as a tournament or championship.

No sub-varsity competition in cross country, track, or wrestling, or any event which combines sub-varsity with varsity level competition, will be approved which seems to establish champions or which provides competitors with any award and/or recognition not provided to all other participants equally.

Proposal:

Sub-varsity multi-school events are not allowed. Exception: Track, Volleyball, Wrestling, and Cross Country sub-varsity multi-school meets may be considered for approval unless (1) a team champion or winner is determined, or (2) the meet is advertised as a tournament or championship. No sub-varsity competition in cross country, track, volleyball or wrestling, or any event which combines sub-varsity with varsity level competition, will be approved which seems to establish champions or which provides competitors with any award and/or recognition not provided to all other participants equally.

Rationale: I propose adding Volleyball to the list of exceptions to be consistent with the Volleyball “Open Date” rule. (Rule 81.8, Pg 82-83, MIAA Handbook) The Volleyball Open Dates have been incredibly successful and the format should be allowed and encouraged at the sub varsity level. Several schools are beginning fledgling Freshman and Middle School teams but cannot find enough single matches to play. Allowing a weekend event with multiple schools provides sub varsity teams with more opportunities for play and helps grow the sport. Format of play can be structured to adhere to the spirit of the current rule with no team champion being determined.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Basketball Committee 18-4-0 Approved Cross Country & Track Committee 9-2-3 Approved Boys' Lacrosse Committee 9-2-0 Approved Girls' Lacrosse Committee 10-2-0 Approved Gymnastics Committee 9-1-0 Approved Softball Committee 13-0-0 Approved Volleyball Committee 11-1-0 Approved Wrestling Committee 10-0-0 Approved Game Officials Committee 8-0-0 Approved TMC 13-0-0 Approved District B 14-0-0 Approved District C 5-0-0 Approved District F 6-0-0 Approved MSSADA 14-0-0 Approved MIAA Board of Directors 9-0-0 Approved MIAC 10-0-0 Approved

5/23/2013 3

2. Page 38 Part III, Rule 40.5.3: Out-of-Season Coach-Athlete Contact Limitations By: Sean MacDonald Current: 40.5.3 A coach's high school candidates must constitute the minority of those taking part in any out-of

season sport's program, and competing on any team at any moment (e.g. no more than two basketball candidates could be on the court, on the same team, at any point during a game). In sports that are individual in nature, or where competition involves a series of scoring events, candidates of that high school coach must be fewer than 50% of those participating in the overall competition or program.

Proposal: A coach's high school candidates must constitute the minority of those taking part in any out-of-season sport's program, and never more than 50% competing on any team at any moment (e.g. no more than two basketball candidates could be on the court, on the same team, at any point during a game). In sports that are individual in nature, or where competition involves a series of scoring events, candidates of that high school coach must be fewer than 50% of those participating in the overall competition or program.

Rational: I believe that Ice Hockey, Lacrosse and Volleyball would be the only sports affected by this very minor change. They are the only team sports that have an even number of participants competing at any time and therefore the only sports where exactly 50% is even possible. For Volleyball or Ice Hockey to achieve a minority of a coach’s candidates on the floor/ice at any moment, only two out of six players would be allowable. That is a percentage of 33%, the lowest percentage of any team sport. Three players would be exactly 50%. Consider: Sport Total Players Allowable # % Football, Field Hockey, Soccer 11 Players 5 Coach’s Candidates 45.4% Baseball, Softball 9 Players 4 Coach’s Candidates 44.4% Basketball 5 Players 2 Coach’s Candidates 40.0% Volleyball / Ice Hockey 6 Players 2 Coach’s Candidates 33.3% With the addition of the Libero player to Volleyball, a team is really rotating SEVEN players within SIX positions on the court. Most Volleyball teams use the Libero player and they are considered a 7th starting player. Being restricted to 2 candidates out of the 7 playing is a percentage of 28.6%, or just over ¼th. Allowing three candidates out of seven starters is a percentage of 42.8%, a minority percentage that is in between baseball and basketball. The rule change would never allow for more than 50% of a coach’s candidates to be on the floor/field/ice at any moment, but would allow instances of exactly 50%. Summary: Out of season teams or programs would still need to be comprised of a minority of a

coach’s candidates. The number competing at any moment would be worded as “never more than 50%”. In most sports, this wording constitutes no change to current rule.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Baseball Committee 10-2-0 Approved Basketball Committee 18-4-0 Approved Cross Country & Track Committee 10-2-1 Approved Boys' Lacrosse Committee 11-2-0 Approved Field Hockey Committee 7-0-1 Approved Football Committee 11-1-0 Approved Girls' Lacrosse Committee 13-0-0 Approved Golf Committee 4-5-1 Rejected Gymnastics Committee 1-9-0 Rejected

5/23/2013 4

Ice Hockey Committee 6-6-0 Ski Committee 0-10-0 Rejected Soccer Committee 19-0-1 Approved Softball Committee 10-3-0 Approved Swimming & Diving Committee 0-9-1 Rejected Volleyball Committee 11-1-0 Approved Wrestling Committee 10-0-0 Approved TMC 11-2-0 Approved District B 7-7-0 District C 5-0-0 Approved District F 0-6-0 Rejected MSSADA 11-3-0 Approved MIAA Board of Directors 7-2-0 Approved MIAC 9-1-0 Approved

3. Page 40 Part III Rule: 43.2.1- Boys and Girls on the Same Team By: Ryan Donahue, Athletic Director, Stoughton High School

Current: Any MIAA member school sponsoring a “mixed gender” sub varsity or varsity team must report to opponents the mixed gender status of their team(s) at least 72 hours prior to each scheduled competition. The “mixed gender” status must also be included on the tournament entry form in the space provided. With the exception of boys’ golf, the combined male & female enrollments will be utilized to determine tournament divisional placement.

Proposal:

To be eliminated: The mixed gender status must also be included on the tournament entry form in the space provided. The combined male & female enrollments will be utilized to determine tournament placement.

Rationale: After the MIAA’s decision during the Fall of 2011 to enforce Stoughton High Schools “bump up” from Division 2 to Division 1 was made based on Rule 43.2.1, as a whole raised a number of troubling issues that the Stoughton Public Schools has identified, and feels needs to be addressed and resolved. These issues include:

1. Only Division II and III schools would be affected by the tournament division placement component

of MIAA Rule 43.2.1. If a rule or ruling cannot be equally applied across all the divisions it is inherently discriminatory in nature.

2. All students in member schools that do not provide a male volleyball team are eligible to participate

in girl’s volleyball, as established under Title IX and MIAA Rule 43.2. By extension, all schools that offer only a girl’s volleyball program should be seeded based on total enrollment. Given the fact that this does not occur, it is unfair to penalize a school’s team as a whole in which an individual student(s) chooses to exercise their right to participate. From the experience of our head volleyball coach throughout the Fall 2011 season, it is evident that many schools are in fact using rule 43.2.1 to discourage male student athletes from exercising their Title IX rights to try out and become a member of a volleyball team. This may also be true in field hockey.

3. There are specific rules in place for boys playing on a girl’s volleyball team, which limits their role

on the team, and in effect, eliminates any type of perceived advantage they may bring to the game. These rules are:

81.7 Boys playing on a girl’s team:

5/23/2013 5

81.7.1 It is a fault for a male player on a mixed gender girls’ team to attack a ball, if, on contact, the

ball is both completely above the height of the net and in the “front zone”. The play becomes illegal when the ball has completely crossed the net untouched or is legally blocked by an opponent.

81.7.2 Only female front row players are permitted to participate in a completed block.

By affecting a team’s divisional tournament placement, the team as a whole is in effect penalized for an individual player(s) who is already participating with severe restrictions that affect their level of participation. Interestingly after examining the fall 2011 tournament seeding only three schools would have been affected by Rule 43.2.1; Stoughton High School – Girls Volleyball, Assabet Valley Regional Voc HS – Girls Field Hockey, and South Hadley – Girls Field Hockey. After careful review of tournament seedings only the Stoughton High School Girls Volleyball team was affected by a divisional placement change (bump-up), while neither field hockey teams were affected by Rule 43.2.1. (Please see attached MIAA Fall 2011 tournament alignments and brackets). This rationale leads us to believe that Rule 43.2.1 has not been applied consistently to all sports.

4. An exception has been put in place for boys’ golf. Has it been legally established that the situation in

boy’s golf is so significantly different for every other potential situation that affects a gender specific sport that they are granted a blanket exemption from MIAA Rule 43.2.1?

5. Other gender specific sports programs, such as Football, determine their tournament divisional

placement based on total school enrollment. This creates a situation where inconsistent tournament divisional placement standards are being applied to a variety of sports within the same organization.

6. MIAA Rule 43.2.1 has a potentially devastating impact on the individual student who now feels

personally responsible for the team being placed in a division comprised of significantly larger schools. From the experience of our head volleyball coach throughout the Fall 2011 season, it is evident that many schools are in fact using rule 43.2.1 to discourage male student athletes from exercising their Title IX rights to try out and become a member of a volleyball team. This may also be true in field hockey.

7. Item 6 leads to the District’s position that changes in tournament divisional placement under MIAA

Rule 43.2.1 based on the gender of an individual participant, in fact acts as a significant barrier to participation for these students. Given the potential consequences they may face if they choose to join the team in which they are the sole member of a given gender. From our experience in the Fall of 2011 this is absolutely true, as our male volleyball team member asked to be removed from the team in attempt to not penalize the rest of his teammates and avoid the future impacts of Rule 43.2.1.

Based on the information and concerns provided in this document, the Stoughton Public Schools would like to respectfully request that a modification of the MIAA Rule 43.2.1, as it applies to the tournament divisional placement be made.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Baseball Committee 1-10-1 Rejected Basketball Committee 1-21-0 Rejected Cross Country & Track Committee 1-11-2 Rejected Boys' Lacrosse Committee 0-13-0 Rejected Field Hockey Committee 3-2-3 Approved Football Committee 4-8-0 Rejected Girls' Lacrosse Committee 0-13-0 Rejected Golf Committee 3-6-1 Rejected

5/23/2013 6

Gymnastics Committee 3-7-0 Rejected Ice Hockey Committee 3-9-0 Rejected Soccer Committee 12-3-3 Approved Softball Committee 1-12-0 Rejected Swimming & Diving Committee 4-2-4 Approved Tennis Committee 0-8-1 Rejected Volleyball Committee 0-12-0 Rejected Wrestling Committee 0-10-0 Rejected – Amendment: To be eliminated: “The combined

male & female enrollments will be utilized to determine tournament placement.” Rationale: Able to track data – but not combine enrollment 9-1-0 Approved

TMC 0-14-0 Rejected District B 0-14-0 Rejected District C 0-5-0 Rejected District F 0-6-0 Rejected MSSADA 0-14-0 Rejected MIAA Board of Directors 0-9-0 Rejected MIAC 1-9-0 Rejected 4. Page 42 Part III Rule: 44.2 - Recruitment By: Dick Baker, Assistant Director, MIAA

Current: 44.2 A school shall be deemed to be in violation of the rule against recruitment if a representative or agent

of the school or any group or individual associated with athletic programs of that school approaches an athlete and directly or indirectly attempts to persuade or induce the athlete to enroll in, or transfer to, that school.

Proposal:

To be added at the end of the rule: Evidence of Recruiting: • Personal contact initiated by coaches, boosters, or other individuals who are indirectly

associated with the school who attempt to persuade transfer. • Gifts of money, jobs, supplies, or clothing • Free transportation • Free admission to contests • An invitation to attend practices and/or games • A social event (other than an official school-wide Open House program) specifically geared

for prospective athletes • A coach asking a prospective student for contact information

Rationale: Helps clarify the Rule of what is not acceptable. (Taken from the Georgia Association).

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Baseball Committee 10-2-0 Approved Basketball Committee 22-0-0 Approved Cross Country & Track Committee 16-0-0 Approved Boys' Lacrosse Committee 13-0-0 Approved Field Hockey Committee 9-0-1 Approved Football Committee 0-12-0 Rejected Girls' Lacrosse Committee 9-0-4 Rejected Golf Committee 10-0-0 Approved Gymnastics Committee 10-0-0 Approved Ice Hockey Committee 8-2-1 Approved

5/23/2013 7

Ski Committee 0-10-0 Rejected – Amended: Remove “Free Admission to Contests” and “an invitation to attend practices and/or games” from the proposal. 8-2-0 Approved

Soccer Committee 4-16-0 Rejected Softball Committee 6-4-3 Approved Sportsmanship Committee 10-0-0 Approved Swimming & Diving Committee 11-0-1 Approved Tennis Committee 0-8-1 Rejected – Amended: add “may include and not limited to” 6-3-0 Approved with amendment Volleyball Committee 12-0-0 Approved Wrestling Committee 0-6-4 Rejected TMC 12-2-0 Approved District B 2-12-0 Rejected District C 5-0-0 Approved District F 6-0-0 Approved MSSADA 13-1-0 Approved MIAA Board of Directors 4-6-0 Rejected MIAC 0-11-0 Rejected 5. Page 44 Part IV Rule: 45 - Loyalty to the High School Team: Bona Fide Team Members – new rule By: Dick Baker, Assistant Director, MIAA

Proposal: New section: 45.1 A student-athlete must be a Team Member for 50% of the regular season schedule for that sport to participate in any MIAA Tournament competition.

Rationale: Presently student-athletes could join a team during the last week of the season and compete in the tournament. This rule would restrict that.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Baseball Committee 12-0-0 Approved Basketball Committee 21-1-0 Approved Cross Country & Track Committee 10-2-2 Approved Boys' Lacrosse Committee 10-2-1 Approved Field Hockey Committee 5-2-3 Approved Football Committee 11-1-0 Approved Girls' Lacrosse Committee 12-0-1 Approved Golf Committee 10-0-0 Approved Gymnastics Committee 9-1-0 Approved Ice Hockey Committee 5-7-0 Rejected Ski Committee 10-0-0 Approved Soccer Committee 4-15-1 Rejected Softball Committee 13-0-0 Approved Sportsmanship Committee 10-0-0 Approved Swimming & Diving Committee 12-0-0 Approved Tennis Committee 0-9-0 Rejected Volleyball Committee 11-0-0 Approved Wrestling Committee 0-10-0 Rejected TMC 14-0-0 Approved District B 4-10-0 Rejected District C 5-0-0 Approved District F 4-2-0 Approved MSSADA 14-0-0 Approved

5/23/2013 8

MIAA Board of Directors 9-0-0 Approved MIAC 11-0-0 Approved 6. Page 44 Part IV Rule: 45 - Loyalty to the High School Team: Bona Fide Team Members – new rule By: Dick Baker, Assistant Director, MIAA Present:

A bona fide member of the school team is a student who is consistently present for, and actively participates in, all high school team sessions (e.g. practices, tryouts, competitions). Bona fide members of a school team are precluded from missing a high school practice or competition in order to participate in a non-school athletic activity/event in any sport recognized by the MIAA. First Offense: Student athlete is suspended for 25% of the season (see chart on Rule 62). Second Offense: Student athlete is suspended for an additional 25% of the season, and is ineligible for tournament play immediately upon confirmation of the violation. See Rule 96 for additional tournament restriction and Rule 86 for waiver guidelines.

Proposal:

Add a third sentence after …. MIAA. Students cannot be given special treatment (late arrival, early dismissal, etc.) for non-school athletic programs.

Rationale: Helps clarify the Rule and was suggested by Bill Wells, who at the time wrote for the Republican Newspaper (local newspaper in Springfield).

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Baseball Committee 11-1-0 Approved Basketball Committee 22-0-0 Approved Cross Country & Track Committee 13-0-2 Approved Boys' Lacrosse Committee 9-3-1 Approved Field Hockey Committee 5-2-3 Approved Football Committee 8-2-2 Approved Girls' Lacrosse Committee 13-0-0 Approved Golf Committee 10-0-0 Approved Gymnastics Committee 12-0-0 Approved Ice Hockey Committee 2-10-0 Rejected Ski Committee 9-0-0 Approved Soccer Committee 11-6-3 Approved Softball Committee 12-1-0 Approved Sportsmanship Committee 10-0-0 Approved Swimming & Diving Committee 12-0-0 Approved Tennis Committee 4-5-0 Rejected Volleyball Committee 11-0-0 Approved Wrestling Committee 10-0-0 Approved TMC 9-4-1 Approved District B 14-0-0 Approved District C 5-0-0 Approved District F 6-0-0 Approved MSSADA 13-1-0 Approved MIAA Board of Directors 10-0-0 Approved MIAC 11-0-0 Approved 7. Page 45 Part IV Rule: 47.3 - Amateurism -- Definitions and Loss of Amateur Standing

5/23/2013 9

By: Dick Baker, Assistant Director, MIAA Present:

47.3 Only awards of intrinsic value and approved by MIAA may be accepted by a high school student-athlete as a result of participation in school or non-school competition in any sport recognized by the Association. Individual interscholastic athletic awards and similar mementos to athletes shall be limited to those approved and administered by the institutions, league, or MIAA in keeping with traditional school requirements as to what constitutes an acceptable award.

Proposal:

Eliminate in first sentence: - and approved by MIAA and add in ( ) definition of intrinsic. Would then read: “Only awards of intrinsic value (i.e. of no monetary worth to anyone else) may be accepted by a high school student-athlete as a result of participation in school or non-school competition in any sport recognized by the Association.”

Rationale: MIAA does not approve or disapprove awards listed here and last sentence outlines awards and who approves.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Baseball Committee 12-0-0 Approved Basketball Committee 22-0-0 Approved Cross Country & Track Committee 15-0-0 Approved Boys' Lacrosse Committee 11-1-1 Approved Field Hockey Committee 10-0-0 Approved Football Committee 5-5-2 Girls' Lacrosse Committee 13-0-0 Approved Golf Committee 9-0-1 Approved Gymnastics Committee 10-1-1 Approved Ice Hockey Committee 3-9-0 Rejected Ski Committee 10-0-0 Approved Soccer Committee 18-0-2 Approved Softball Committee 13-0-0 Approved Swimming & Diving Committee 10-0-2 Approved Tennis Committee 4-4-1 Volleyball Committee 11-0-0 Approved Wrestling Committee 10-0-0 Approved TMC 14-0-0 Approved District B 14-0-0 Approved District C 5-0-0 Approved District F 6-0-0 Approved MSSADA 13-1-0 Approved MIAA Board of Directors 9-0-0 Approved -Voted to approve as amended to read: “Only

awards of no monetary….” MIAC 11-0-0 Approved 8. Page 46

Part IV, Rule 49: Sportsmanship: Athlete and Coach Contest Disqualifications/Suspensions – New Rule

By: Bill Gaine

Proposal: New Rule: Add to Rule 49 “Athlete and Coach Disqualifications” – Any student athlete who is disqualified from any interscholastic contest must complete the National Federation Sportsmanship

5/23/2013 10

on-line course – “Sportsmanship – it’s up to you”, before reestablishing eligibility. This course is free.

Rationale:

The addition of this requirement to the suspension rule for students disqualified is parallel to the requirement for disqualified coaches. The element of education and perspective relative to sportsmanship is an important component of the Educational Athletics Curriculum.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Baseball Committee 5-6-1 Rejected Basketball Committee 21-1-0 Approved Cross Country & Track Committee 10-1-4 Approved Boys' Lacrosse Committee 2-11-0 Rejected Field Hockey Committee 9-0-1 Approved Football Committee 0-12-0 Rejected – Amended-“recommend that” 12-0-0 Approved Girls' Lacrosse Committee 0-11-2 Rejected Golf Committee 10-0-0 Approved Gymnastics Committee 0-12-0 Rejected Ice Hockey Committee 4-8-0 Rejected Ski Committee 9-0-1 Approved Soccer Committee 18-2-0 Approved Softball Committee 6-7-0 Rejected – Amended to read “recommend”: 13-0-0 Approved Sportsmanship Committee 10-0-0 Approved Swimming & Diving Committee 10-2-0 Approved Tennis Committee 8-0-1 Approved Volleyball Committee 11-0-0 Approved Educational Athletics Committee 6-0-0 Approved Wrestling Committee 9-1-0 Approved Game Officials Committee 8-0-0 Approved TMC 14-0-0 Approved District B 3-11-0 Rejected District C 4-1-0 Approved District F 6-0-0 Approved MSSADA 7-7-0 MIAA Board of Directors 8-1-0 Approved MIAC 11-0-0 Approved

9. Page 46

Part IV, Rule 49: Sportsmanship: Athlete and Coach Contest Disqualifications/Suspensions – New Rule

By: Bill Gaine

Proposal: New Rule: A Community Service Team Event will be indentified and implemented by each sport’s program sponsored by MIAA member schools. The Community Service initiative will be determined by the school’s Athletic Director and/or coach of the respective sport. The high school coach will organize and monitor said event.

Rationale:

To recognize the privilege of athletic participation and the responsibility of giving back to the community.

5/23/2013 11

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Baseball Committee 0-11-0 Rejected Basketball Committee 0-22-0 Rejected Cross Country & Track Committee 0-13-2 Rejected Boys' Lacrosse Committee 2-9-2 Rejected Field Hockey Committee 0-10-0 Rejected Football Committee 0-12-0 Rejected Girls' Lacrosse Committee 0-13-0 Rejected Golf Committee 0-10-0 Rejected Gymnastics Committee 0-12-0 Rejected Ice Hockey Committee 1-11-0 Rejected Ski Committee 0-10-0 Rejected Soccer Committee 0-20-0 Rejected Softball Committee 0-13-0 Rejected Sportsmanship Committee 0-10-0 Rejected Swimming & Diving Committee 0-12-0 Rejected Tennis Committee 0-9-0 Rejected Volleyball Committee 0-11-0 Rejected Educational Athletics Committee 5-0-1 Approved Wrestling Committee 0-10-0 Rejected Game Officials Committee 0-8-0 Rejected TMC 0-14-0 Rejected District B 0-14-0 Rejected District C 0-5-0 Rejected District F 0-6-0 Rejected MSSADA 1-13-0 Rejected MIAA Board of Directors 1-9-0 Rejected MIAC 0-11-0 Rejected

10. Page 49

Part IV, Rule 51: Student Eligibility: Baseline Eligibility Requirements By: Karen & Frank Harrington

Current: For a student to practice with, or to represent a MIAA member school in athletic competition, the student must be duly enrolled in that school. Additionally, the student must be a candidate for that school’s diploma, subject to the jurisdiction of that school’s principal (i.e. the principal must have the authority to suspend the student from classes), and under the supervision of that school principal (i.e. the principal must have control and knowledge of the student’s daily attendance and achievement).

Ultimately the interpretation and application of Association rules rests with the MIAA executive director/staff and the Board of Directors. Principals (or athletic directors) must contact the Association executive staff to resolve any possible eligibility issues before permitting a student to represent your school. This rule complements Rule 52, 53, 54 and 55.

Proposal:

To allow student athletes who attend Technical/Vocational Schools to participate in their hometown public school if the technical/vocational school doesn’t offer the sport.

Rationale:

This would give the students a chance to continue playing a sport they like and develop teamwork and friendship among peers who have the same interest.

5/23/2013 12

Our son is a freshman at Essex Aggie and he swims. He can’t swim for Essex Aggie because they do not have a swim team. The athletic director in Peabody (the city we reside in) said MIAA Rules do not allow our son to swim for them either. We have been told that if we wanted to swim we should have sent him to Peabody and if we want him to play sports he should chose one Essex Aggie offers. These are nice ideas but flawed. We made the choice to send him to Essex Aggie because we feel it is the best place for him academically. Making a school choice based on the sports offered shouldn’t come into the equation when making an academic decision. He doesn’t play the winter sports Essex Aggie offers so choosing one of them wouldn’t make sense.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Baseball Committee 2-8-0 Rejected Basketball Committee 1-21-0 Rejected Cross Country & Track Committee 3-11-1 Rejected Boys' Lacrosse Committee 1-11-0 Rejected Field Hockey Committee 5-5-0 Football Committee 3-8-0 Rejected Girls' Lacrosse Committee 0-12-1 Rejected Gymnastics Committee 0-12-0 Rejected Ice Hockey Committee 3-9-0 Rejected Soccer Committee 1-19-0 Rejected Softball Committee 0-13-0 Rejected Tennis Committee 0-9-0 Rejected Volleyball Committee 0-11-0 Rejected Wrestling Committee 0-9-1 Rejected TMC 0-14-0 Rejected District B 0-14-0 Rejected District C 0-5-0 Rejected District F 0-6-0 Rejected MSSADA 0-14-0 Rejected MIAA Board of Directors 0-10-0 Rejected MIAC 1-10-0 Rejected 11. Page 49 Part IV, Rule 51: Student Eligibility: Baseline Eligibility Requirements By: George Small

Current: 51. For a student to practice with, or to represent a MIAA member school in athletic competition, the

student must be duly enrolled in that school. Additionally, the student must be a candidate for that school’s diploma, subject to the jurisdiction of that school’s principal (i.e. the principal must have the authority to suspend the student from classes), and under the supervision of that school principal (i.e. the principal must have control and knowledge of the student’s daily attendance and achievement). Ultimately the interpretation and application of Association rules rests with the MIAA executive director/staff and the Board of Directors. Principals (or athletic directors) must contact the Association executive staff to resolve any possible eligibility issues before permitting a student to represent your school. This rule complements Rule 52, 53, 54 and 55.

Proposal:

Suggest the following modification and addition to Rule 51: Non-MIAA member Private School Students:

5/23/2013 13

A student who is duly enrolled in a private school, that is not a MIAA member school, and who wishes to participate in a sport that is not offered at the private school where that student is enrolled, may apply to participate in the sport at the local district public high school which is also a MIAA member school. The following conditions must be met and agreed to in writing by the principals of both schools:

•The student must be a candidate for the private school's diploma, subject to the jurisdiction of that school's principal (i.e. the principal must have the authority to suspend the student from classes), and under the supervision of that school principal (i.e. the principal must have control and knowledge of the student's daily attendance and achievement). •The parents must submit a written request to the principal of the MIAA member public high school requesting their son/daughter's eligibility to try out for an athletic team in interscholastic competition. • The student resides in the school district that serves the MIAA member public high school, and is living with his/her parents or legal guardians in the family residence. In multiple school districts, a student must be assigned to the school of record in the same manner as other students. • The MIAA member public high school principal receives daily reports of the student’s attendance and achievement. This principal is satisfied that the student meets the standards for athletic participation required for all other students as defined in the current MIAA Handbook. This includes, but is not limited to, those rules governing transfers, academic eligibility, age requirements, physical and medical coverage requirements, and the number of consecutive seasons of athletic eligibility beyond grade eight. • MIAA requirements relative to academic eligibility must be certified by the MIAA member public high school principal at the same times that all other student athletes are to be certified as academically eligible. •If the MIAA member public high school principal determines that all eligibility standards detailed above have been met, this principal may declare the student eligible to participate in interscholastic competition. The rights, privileges, and responsibilities associated with all other student athletes attending MIAA member schools will apply to private non-MIAA member school students who have satisfied the requirements above.

Rationale:

This policy change simply corrects a situation where many Massachusetts private high school student athletes and their families have been disenfranchised by current MIAA student eligibility requirements.

Many parents of student athletes have been faced with undue hardship when choosing to send their student athlete to a small private school due to academic achievement or religious concerns and when these schools are not able to provide the team sport in which the student athlete is interested and capable. Changing the current MIAA student eligibility requirements to accommodate these students and their families will assuredly not result in an unfair competitive advantage to any MIAA member public high school and will not in any way diminish the MIAA's current mission, philosophy or standards. Rather, it will rightly extend the MIAA's mission of enriching the educational experience of MIAA school member students to these additional Massachusetts student athletes who meet the above criteria in non-MIAA member private schools. These same student athletes will also then gain the valuable lifelong and life-quality learning experiences that come with participation in successful interscholastic athletic programs.

Further evidence from other state interscholastic athletic associations also shows that such a policy change is needed. An example of some of the states that accommodate such private school student athletes are:

5/23/2013 14

1) New Hampshire (see the NHIAA Handbook, by-law Article II, Eligibility, section 13:… Home Educated and Non-Public Students).

- Here the NHIAA declares that non-public (private) school students to be immediately eligible to try out for the district public high school team when certain reasonable specified conditions are met. This is also New Hampshire state law. Furthermore, since the enactment of this state law and its enforcement by the NHIAA, it has not created any significant burden upon the NHIAA or New Hampshire public high schools.

2) Colorado (see the 2010-2011 Colorado High School Activities Association State Statutes

Handbook [A review of the Colorado State Laws affecting High School Activities Participation])

- This includes a review of the text of what is now Colorado state law allowing for participation of private school students in interscholastic athletic programs at the local public school when the private school does not sponsor a specific activity.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Baseball Committee 0-10-0 Rejected Basketball Committee 0-22-0 Rejected Cross Country & Track Committee 0-15-0 Rejected Boys' Lacrosse Committee 0-12-0 Rejected Field Hockey Committee 0-9-1 Rejected Football Committee 0-10-1 Rejected Girls' Lacrosse Committee 0-13-0 Rejected Gymnastics Committee 0-12-0 Rejected Ice Hockey Committee 0-12-0 Rejected Soccer Committee 0-20-0 Rejected Softball Committee 0-13-0 Rejected Tennis Committee 0-9-0 Rejected Volleyball Committee 0-11-0 Rejected Wrestling Committee 0-10-0 Rejected TMC 0-14-0 Rejected District B 0-14-0 Rejected District C 0-5-0 Rejected District F 0-6-0 Rejected MSSADA 0-14-0 Rejected MIAA Board of Directors 0-10-0 Rejected MIAC 0-11-0 Rejected 12. Page 49 Part IV, Rules 51, 52: Baseline Eligibility Requirements By: Pamela Duffy

Current: 51. Student Eligibility: Baseline Eligibility Requirements

For a student to practice with, or to represent a MIAA member school in athletic competition, the student must be duly enrolled in that school. Additionally, the student must be a candidate for that school’s diploma, subject to the jurisdiction of that school’s principal (i.e. the principal must have the authority to suspend the student from classes), and under the supervision of that school principal (i.e. the principal must have control and knowledge of the student’s daily attendance and achievement).

Ultimately the interpretation and application of Association rules rests with the MIAA executive

director/staff and the Board of Directors. Principals (or athletic directors) must contact the

5/23/2013 15

Association executive staff to resolve any possible eligibility issues before permitting a student to represent your school. This rule complements Rule 52, 53, 54 and 55.

52. Student Eligibility: Alternative, Collaborative, Detached or Other Non-Traditional Educational

Programs

Students who are not being educated on the high school campus that will issue their diplomas are not eligible to represent that, or any member high school, unless the criteria within this rule are satisfied. If the student is not eligible at the attending college or the alternative institution does not offer any athletic participation opportunity, a student may participate in the diploma-granting MIAA high school if that principal:

• has the authority to suspend the student from all academic programs; and • receives daily reports of the student’s attendance and achievement; and • Certifies the student is eligible by all other MIAA and local standards that must be

satisfied by the student’s teammates.

(The above conditions must be agreed to in writing by the non member-school director prior to any practice or athletic participation by the student at the high school that is awarding the diploma.) These non-traditional students may not participate if they do not meet all of the eligibility standards that are required of their teammates. Principals, athletic directors, and guidance personnel should counsel students regarding athletic eligibility prior to committing to non-traditional educational pursuits.

Proposal:

Students, who attend a technical/vocational school located in the same town they reside in, shall be eligible to play interscholastic athletics at their home public high school provided that the school they are presently attending does not offer the same sport.

Rationale: Students that have been born & raised in a town and then choose to attend a technical/vocational school in that same town, which does not offer a sport that is offered at the home public high school, should have the opportunity to participate at the home public high school.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Baseball Committee 2-8-0 Rejected Basketball Committee 0-22-0 Rejected Cross Country & Track Committee 3-11-1 Rejected Boys' Lacrosse Committee 0-12-0 Rejected Field Hockey Committee 5-5-0 Football Committee 1-9-1 Rejected Girls' Lacrosse Committee 0-12-1 Rejected Gymnastics Committee 0-12-0 Rejected Ice Hockey Committee 2-10-0 Rejected Soccer Committee 1-19-0 Rejected Softball Committee 0-13-0 Rejected Tennis Committee 0-9-0 Rejected Volleyball Committee 0-11-0 Rejected Wrestling Committee 0-10-0 Rejected TMC 0-13-1 Rejected District B 0-14-0 Rejected

5/23/2013 16

District C 0-5-0 Rejected District F 0-6-0 Rejected MSSADA 0-14-0 Rejected MIAA Board of Directors 0-10-0 Rejected MIAC 0-11-0 Rejected 13. Page 50 Part IV, Rule 53: Student Eligibility: Middle School Students on Senior High Teams

By: South Shore League – Mike Schultz, Director of Comprehensive Health, Athletics & Assistant Principal, Carver Middle-High School

Current: 53. A middle school student is eligible to represent a senior high school on its athletic teams only when

the MIAA member high school includes those grades and they are under the direct “jurisdiction” and “supervision” of the high school principal (see Rule 51 for definitions).

Proposal: In an attempt to create consistency throughout the state, any school using eighth grade students for competition at the high school level; can only compete at lowest level offered in that sport (i.e. if school only has a boys varsity tennis team and eighth grade student(s) are participating, they play on the varsity team. If girls’ basketball team has V, JV, and Freshman levels, the eighth grade student(s) participates at the Freshman level only.

Rationale: The rationale behind the proposal is to prevent students from leaving for a neighboring town because they allow 8th graders to play up. We are also hoping to eventually get District C to allow the league to approve 8th grade use where necessary to field teams and not have to get their approval at the 11th hour not knowing how many student-athletes will go out for a particular team.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Baseball Committee 1-8-0 Rejected Basketball Committee 4-18-0 Rejected Cross Country & Track Committee 3-10-2 Rejected Boys' Lacrosse Committee 2-11-0 Rejected Field Hockey Committee 1-3-6 Rejected Football Committee 10-0-1 Approved Girls' Lacrosse Committee 0-11-2 Rejected Gymnastics Committee 0-11-0 Rejected Ice Hockey Committee 2-10-0 Rejected Ski Committee 1-9-0 Rejected Soccer Committee 3-15-2 Rejected Softball Committee 1-12-0 Rejected Sports Medicine Committee 4-6-0 Rejected Tennis Committee 3-6-0 Rejected Volleyball Committee 0-11-0 Rejected Wrestling Committee 0-9-1 Rejected TMC 3-10-1 Rejected District B 5-9-0 Rejected District C 1-4-0 Rejected District F 1-5-0 Rejected MSSADA 1-13-0 Rejected MIAA Board of Directors 0-10-0 Rejected MIAC 0-11-0 Rejected

5/23/2013 17

14. Page 50 Part IV, Rule 53: Student Eligibility: Middle School Students on Senior High Teams

By: Eric Degnan, Monson High School Teacher

Current: 53. A middle school student is eligible to represent a senior high school on its athletic teams only when

the MIAA member high school includes those grades and they are under the direct “jurisdiction” and “supervision” of the high school principal (see Rule 51 for definitions).

Proposal: Revise the rule to allow all school districts to include 7th and 8th grade students at both the varsity and junior varsity level regardless if they are under the same Principal, as long as they are in the same school district.

Rationale: Some small schools/districts are at a disadvantage when their 7th and 8th grade students are housed at a school other than the high school while other larger school districts choose to have their high schools consist of grades 7-12.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Baseball Committee 2-7-0 Rejected Basketball Committee 2-20-0 Rejected Cross Country & Track Committee 1-14-0 Rejected Boys' Lacrosse Committee 0-13-0 Rejected Field Hockey Committee 2-8-0 Rejected Football Committee 0-11-0 Rejected Girls' Lacrosse Committee 0-13-0 Rejected Gymnastics Committee 0-12-0 Rejected Ice Hockey Committee 2-10-0 Rejected Ski Committee 1-8-1 Rejected Soccer Committee 1-19-0 Rejected Softball Committee 1-12-0 Rejected Sports Medicine Committee 1-9-0 Rejected Tennis Committee 1-8-0 Rejected Volleyball Committee 0-11-0 Rejected Wrestling Committee 0-10-0 Rejected TMC 0-14-0 Rejected District B 0-14-0 Rejected District C 0-5-0 Rejected District F 2-4-0 Rejected MSSADA 0-14-0 Rejected MIAA Board of Directors 0-10-0 Rejected MIAC 0-11-0 Rejected 15. Page 52

Part IV, Rule 56.2: Student Eligibility/School Requirements: Physical Examinations/Medical Coverage/Concussions

By: Frank Mastrangelo, LAT, ATC, EMT

Current: 56.2 Each school’s medical person/staff is responsible for the members of that team. These individuals

annually must have taken, and been certified in, the NFHS on-line Concussion Course or other recognized education program. In the event of injury, that medical person/staff will make the final judgment as to whether a student athlete may return to play (please see Rule 56.4 below regarding concussions). Whenever a medical person is on duty at an athletic event, he/she shall be responsible for both teams (unless the other team has its own medical person present). His/her judgment will be

5/23/2013 18

final. Physical disqualification by the medical person renders the student ineligible. The Penalty for playing an ineligible student is forfeiture.

Proposal: When a physician is not present at an athletic event, a licensed/certified athletic trainer, if available, shall be considered the higher medical authority on-site when an EMT is providing medical coverage at the same event.

Rationale: EMT’s are required to respond, treat & transport all patients. The EMT is not trained or authorized to treat & release a patient, nor is an EMT allowed to act as (impersonate) an athletic trainer. In this setting the licensed (certified) athletic trainer is the higher medical authority, operating under physician medical credentials for their records. Further, under MGL C.111c, Section 19 (3) “No person shall: provide EMS or hold oneself out as, or use the title of EMS first responder, emergency medical technician, or paramedic or the acronym EMT or any other title or acronym used by the department in the certification of emergency medical services personnel under this chapter, in violation of section 9, or other than on behalf of an EMS first response service or an ambulance service or other EMS provider duly licensed or otherwise approved under this chapter.” In other words no person may act as an EMT, unless employed or on duty with an ambulance service or other licensed EMS agency.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Baseball Committee 10-0-0 Approved Basketball Committee 22-0-0 Approved Cross Country & Track Committee 14-0-1 Approved Boys' Lacrosse Committee 0-3-10 Rejected Field Hockey Committee 9-0-1 Approved Football Committee 11-0-0 Approved Girls' Lacrosse Committee 0-1-11 Rejected Gymnastics Committee 11-1-0 Approved Ice Hockey Committee 12-0-0 Approved Soccer Committee 13-4-3 Approved Softball Committee 13-0-0 Approved Sports Medicine Committee 9-01 Approved Swimming & Diving Committee 0-5-5 Rejected Volleyball Committee 11-0-0 Approved Wrestling Committee 6-1-3 Approved Game Officials Committee 8-0-0 Approved TMC 14-0-0 Approved District B 12-2-0 Approved District C 5-0-0 Approved District F 6-0-0 Approved MSSADA 14-0-0 Approved MIAA Board of Directors 10-0-0 Approved MIAC 11-0-0 Approved 16. Page 62 Part V, Rule 66.1 - Basketball

By: Sports Medicine Committee Current Rule: 66.1 Mouth guards are highly recommended for all basketball players while on the court.

5/23/2013 19

Proposal: Mouth guards are required for all players in boys’ and girls’ basketball.

Rationale: The MIAA Sports Medicine Committee has always been in the forefront of preventative sports medicine protection, based on recommendations of the medical community and sound, proven medical studies. The studies on the rate of oral/facial injuries in both basketball and soccer show the need of oral protection. The use of mouth guards in these sports is being addressed by the NCAA and NFHS through ongoing research (and the use of mouth guards by Massachusetts student-athletes). Studies done by the University of North Carolina, Florida Dental Health Association, Journal of the American Dental Association and University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio Dental School, show proof of a high injury rate among basketball and soccer players without proper oral protection. Coaches in soccer and basketball have stated health and safety concerns with mouth guard use in their specific sport-specifically dirt, pesticides, feces and fertilizer. There is research available; supporting that there has never been a case of a student-athlete being affected by illness or disease through the use of a mouth guard on a playing field of basketball or soccer. In the sports that have mandatory mouth guard use (football, ice hockey, field hockey, lacrosse), there is no medical evidence of disease being passed through airborne contact or handling of mouth guards during competition. This includes, as an example, football linemen replacing mouth guards in their mouths following a group huddle in a mud-induced game. The SMC has reviewed and discussed the “Mouth Guard Issue” for several years. We have studied the data and have heard from experts discussing the protective benefit of mouth guards. The SMC strongly supports the rule as it was written requiring the use of mouth guards. According to the Academy of Sports Dentistry, basketball is considered one of the highest-risked sports for facial and head injuries. In fact, when mouth guards are not worn routinely when playing basketball, 34 percent of injuries are orofacial. Furthermore, the National Youth Sports Foundation for the Prevention of Athletic Injuries, Inc. reports that dental injuries are the most common type of orofacial injury sustained during participation in sports. Victims of total tooth avulsions who do not have teeth properly preserved or replanted can face thousands of dollars in dental costs per tooth and many hours in the dentist’s chair. The MDS strongly urges the MIAA to mandate the mouth guard requirement for basketball. The National Federation Sports Medicine Committee is currently reviewing the adoption of a requirement for mouth guards in soccer and basketball. Research studies are documented that currently support mandatory use. Sports Medical Committee members welcome the opportunity to present their rationale to committees upon request. Mouth guards for Soccer and Basketball are necessary protective equipment. The MIAA presently highly recommends mouth guards be worn during practice and game situations in the sports of soccer and basketball. The Sports Medicine Committee of the MIAA has reviewed

5/23/2013 20

the research and statistics and concludes that the use of mouth guards will prevent or greatly reduce the chance of the athletes suffering tooth damage or loss, jaw fractures, TMJ problems or damage to the lips, tongue and cheeks. Organizations that recommend mouth guards for basketball and soccer include the American Dental Association, Massachusetts Dental Society, The Academy for Sports Dentistry, Massachusetts Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, National Athletic Trainers Association, National Youth Safety Foundation, National Association of Secondary School Principals and the National Federation. The current cost to have a fractured tooth bonded is approximately $300. If the tooth needs a veneer or crown the cost is $1200-$1500. The national average for longevity of these restorations is 5-10 years, therefore over a lifetime of a high school student athlete a fractured tooth may cost $8500-$15,000 a tooth. If the tooth needs a root canal, the added fee is $1000-$1200. If a tooth is lost and an implant is placed the fee for the bone preservation, implant surgery, and restoration is approximately $5000. A properly fitted custom mouth guard is the best type for protection, comfort, breathing and speech, but any mouth guard will give much more protection than none at all. The cost of a mouth guard is minimal. The Massachusetts Dental Society has a program called “Grin and Wear It” in which dentists have agreed to make mouth guards at a reduced fee. Access to further information about this program is on the MIAA webpage.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Basketball Committee 0-22-0 Rejected Game Officials Committee 1-7-0 Rejected Sports Medicine Committee 10-0-0 Approved TMC 7-6-0 Approved District B 1-13-0 Rejected District C 0-5-0 Rejected District F 0-6-0 Rejected MSSADA 2-12-0 Rejected MIAA Board of Directors 0-10-0 Rejected MIAC 1-10-0 Rejected 17. Page 63 Part V, Add Bowling as a recognized MIAA Sport

By: Jamie Penny Burden

Proposal: Add Bowling as an MIAA sanctioned sport.

Rationale: Since 2008, my colleague, Jean McNerney and I have volunteered as the Bowling Team Advisors helping over 200 students from South High School become participants of the Bowling Team. Each year our student membership grows, allowing more students the opportunity to learn how to bowl and to compete against 5 local high schools managed by the Worcester County USBC. At the close of every season, South High competes in the State Championship with Berkshire County USBC. The competition recognizes teams and individuals for their outstanding commitment and performance during the season. In 2010, the State Individual Champion, Cameron Jandrow, represented South High and the school has proudly held the title of County Champs since 2008. Currently South High’s student population is 77% low income, 25% English Language Learners and 23% Special Education. Our school houses the largest population of life skills students in the

5/23/2013 21

district. Although this demographic data might seem daunting for state mandated testing it is the reality of our school and we work very hard for these students and their educational promotion through high school and beyond. Research shows that extra curricular activities have a positive impact on student performance. Students involved in activities such as bowling have less truancy, lower retention rates, higher academic performance and a heightened sense of school pride. Traditionally, athletic programs select students who have natural athletic ability, excluding the majority of our student population. The South High Bowling Team is perfect for the non-traditional athlete in the urban setting that may be limited by exposure to sports and the financial commitment to participate. The Bowling Team fills the gap traditional sports leaves behind, giving South student athletes the opportunity to be a part of a physical sport and feel the fulfillment and joy of success. The WCUSBC has provided students with bowling shoes and practice time – students fundraise for their bowling shirt and pay small dues to help with team fees. Most importantly the South High Bowling Team uses and follows the MIAA rules along with all other WCUSBC competing schools. We promote the pillars of MIAA educational athletics of wellness, sportsmanship, coaches' education, leadership and community service. Since South High is such a diverse school students on our team have hailed from Liberia, Guatemala, Vietnam and Brazil – having no bowling experience before joining the South High Team. Due to the weekly bowling competitions and practices students learn the importance of school attendance to participate in a sport as well as passing grades to stay on the team. Students have not only improved their grades – they also improved their game, team skills and ability to work with others. The importance of these skills for our student body helps them to grow as learners, citizens of Worcester and beyond. As the Bowling Team Advisor, I am very proud of my program and have seen what a life changing experience bowling has been for my kids. Over the four years more than 200 students have committed to the team, proudly displaying their bowling trophies and boasting their improved student growth evidenced in grades, standardized test scores, and decline in behavioral issues. Together, we believe that X=bowling, and that will only lead to continued exponential student success.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: TMC 1-12-1 Rejected District B 7-7-0 District C 4-1-0 Approved District F 5-1-0 Approved Sportsmanship Committee 2-8-0 Rejected MSSADA 9-5-0 Approved MIAA Board of Directors 0-9-1 Rejected MIAC 3-8-0 Rejected 18. Page 65, 70, 110 Part V, Rule 69.2, 72.3, and 97.4.2

By: Sean Burns

Current: 69.2 A licensed physician, licensed trainer or certified EMT must be in attendance and on duty for all

interscholastic football games…. 72.3 A licensed physician, licensed trainer or certified EMT must be in attendance and on duty for all

varsity ice hockey games…. 97.4.2 Football and Ice Hockey: A game will not start unless a licensed physician, licensed athletic trainer

or certified EMT is present.

5/23/2013 22

Proposal: Please insert: Equipped with an AED after the word EMT

Rationale: An AED being on site is necessary because student athletes are being injured from chest wall contact during contests.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Football Committee 10-0-1 Approved Ice Hockey Committee 9-3-0 Approved Sports Medicine Committee 1-9-0 Rejected – Amendment: Home team is responsible for making an AED available at…. 10-0-0 Approved Game Officials Committee 7-1-0 Approved TMC 13-0-1 Approved District B 14-0-0 Approved District C 5-0-0 Approved District F 6-0-0 Approved MSSADA 12-2-0 Approved MIAA Board of Directors 10-0-0 Approved with amendment: edit language to place the responsibility upon home team or home site medical personnel. MIAC 11-0-0 Approved as amended: edit language to place the responsibility upon home team or home site medical personnel. 19. Page 70-71

Part V, Rule 72: Ice Hockey – modification to the National Federation Rules By: Chad Kelley – Hockey Official, South Shore NIHOA

Proposal:

The tooth and mouth protector must be attached to the face mask unless the player has a signed note from a physician or dentist that states why the mouthpiece cannot be attached.

Rational:

Having the tooth and mouth protector attached to the facemask serves multiple purposes. First, it prevents the athlete’s airway from becoming blocked as the result of a swallowed mouthpiece. Secondly, it protects both players and officials from stepping on a tooth and mouth protector that has fallen to the ice. Lastly, by attaching the tooth and mouth protector to the mask, it assists the on-ice officials and coaches with the enforcement of rule 3, section 4, article 4 of the National Frederation Handbook “All players, including goalkeepers, shall wear and have properly inserted into their mouth during the course of play a tooth and mouth protector..”

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Ice Hockey Committee 0-12-0 Rejected Game Officials Committee 8-0-0 Approved Sports Medicine Committee 1-9-0 Rejected TMC 1-11-2 Rejected District B 9-5-0 Approved District C 3-2-0 Approved District F 6-0-0 Approved MSSADA 6-8-0 Rejected MIAA Board of Directors 0-10-0 Rejected MIAC 0-11-0 Rejected 20. Page 71

5/23/2013 23

Part V, Rule 72.16 & 72.17 By: MIAA Ice Hockey Committee Current Rule: 72.16 Any coaching staff member who receives two game misconducts and/or game disqualification

penalties during the pre-season and/or regular season games shall not participate in the MIAA tournament. The MIAA Ice Hockey Committee has ruled that 2 disqualifications for a coach or a player could occur in 1 game – if reported that way from the official(s).

72.17 A team will not qualify for the MIAA Tournament if its players receive collectively during preseason

contests (officiated by MIAA referees) and/or during regular season games a combination of more than three disqualifications and/or game misconduct penalties.

Proposal: Game misconduct called by an Ice Hockey Official would eliminate a player from the remainder of that game only as per National Federation Rules. Amend MIAA Rule 72.16 and 72.17 – eliminate reference to game misconduct penalties.

Rationale: This is consistent with National Federation Rules. MIAA had amended the National Federation Rules and made the ramifications of the game misconduct penalty more restrictive. This doesn’t deter an official from making a DQ call at anytime.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Ice Hockey Committee 12-0-0 Approved Sportsmanship Committee 10-0-0 Approved Game Officials Committee 8-0-0 Approved TMC 13-1-0 Approved District B 14-0-0 Approved District C 5-0-0 Approved District F 6-0-0 Approved MSSADA 14-0-0 Approved MIAA Board of Directors 9-0-0 Approved MIAC 11-0-0 Approved 21. Page 71

Part V, Rule 72: Ice Hockey – new rule By: Thomas Hannon, Sr.

Proposal:

Requesting that the MIAA have a Review Committee responsible for reviewing hits to the head that result in injury to a player where a penalty is not called or missed by a referee. The hits involved must be on video tape. Serious hits to the head that result in injury to the player and a penalty has been called by the referees may also be subject to further review by the MIAA Review Committee.

Rationale: On January 7, 2012, my son Tucker Hannon playing for Duxbury High School Hockey took a very serious hit to the head by a player on an opposing team which was documented on video tape. The referees did not see the hit therefore no penalty was called. The hit resulted in Tucker getting a serious concussion. He spent two weeks in darkness because of the sensitivity to light and had massive headaches. He missed five weeks of school and missed most

5/23/2013 24

of his junior year of High School Hockey. Tucker is still suffering from headaches and tiredness four months later. I am asking for the MIAA to seriously consider starting a review committee that will be able to look at these hits to the heads which are on video tape and where officials on the ice missed the hit. The players need to be held accountable for their actions so they do not continue this behavior in future games and hurt other players. I spoke with Skip Church about this and he agreed that it would be helpful to have another set of eyes to review hits to the head for the hits the referees may have missed. Also, with the NHL setting a good example of making their players accountable such as just recently when Raffi Torres from the NHL hit a player to the head where he did not receive a penalty on the ice. After review of the hit by Brendan Shannahan, Torres was issued a 25 game suspension. We have also had parents, not only from our town but other towns, call my wife and I who have had their children hit intentionally after the play during a high school game where the officials did not see the hit. The players that hit them were never held accountable for their actions. Many of these players have also come away with concussions or serious injuries. Some of these parents stated that the concussion or injury resulted in ending their child’s high school sports career when the players’ who hit them are continuing to play and be a threat to players in future games. With my son’s situation being brought out to the public eye, it has set a very bad precedence, that hits like the one my son took, are okay if you are not caught on the ice by an official. I feel with a review committee in place for the MIAA the coaches and referees can explain to players before the game starts that they are accountable for their actions even if the referee misses the penalty. The players will think before they hit another player intentionally which will hopefully result in a lot less concussions and injuries. After reviewing the MIAA Mission Statement, I feel it is in the best interest for all high school athletes to have the MIAA form a review committee which will provide leadership support for the conduct of the athletes and insure a safe environment for all players. By holding the high school athletes accountable for their actions this will set a good example of sportsmanship and teach them life long lessons. If the MIAA can have a review committee and prevent one young athlete from receiving a severe concussion or injury, then the MIAA will have done their job and have supported and honored their mission statement.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Ice Hockey Committee 0-12-0 Rejected Sportsmanship Committee 0-10-0 Rejected Sports Medicine Committee 0-10-0 Rejected Game Officials Committee 0-8-0 Rejected TMC 1-12-1 Rejected District B 0-14-0 Rejected District C 0-5-0 Rejected District F 0-6-0 Rejected MSSADA 0-14-0 Rejected MIAA Board of Directors 0-9-0 Rejected MIAC 0-11-0 Rejected 22. Page 75 Part V, 77.1.5 - Soccer

By: Sports Medicine Committee

5/23/2013 25

Current Rule: 77.1.5 Mouth guards are highly recommended for all soccer players while on the field.

Proposal:

Mouth guards are required for all players in boys’ and girls’ soccer.

Rationale: The MIAA Sports Medicine Committee has always been in the forefront of preventative sports medicine protection, based on recommendations of the medical community and sound, proven medical studies. The studies on the rate of oral/facial injuries in both basketball and soccer show the need of oral protection. The use of mouth guards in these sports is being addressed by the NCAA and NFHS through ongoing research (and the use of mouth guards by Massachusetts student-athletes). Studies done by the University of North Carolina, Florida Dental Health Association, Journal of the American Dental Association and University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio Dental School, show proof of a high injury rate among basketball and soccer players without proper oral protection. Coaches in soccer and basketball have stated health and safety concerns with mouth guard use in their specific sport-specifically dirt, pesticides, feces and fertilizer. There is research available; supporting that there has never been a case of a student-athlete being affected by illness or disease through the use of a mouth guard on a playing field of basketball or soccer. In the sports that have mandatory mouth guard use (football, ice hockey, field hockey, lacrosse), there is no medical evidence of disease being passed through airborne contact or handling of mouth guards during competition. This includes, as an example, football linemen replacing mouth guards in their mouths following a group huddle in a mud-induced game. The SMC has reviewed and discussed the “Mouth Guard Issue” for several years. We have studied the data and have heard from experts discussing the protective benefit of mouth guards. The SMC strongly supports the rule as it was written requiring the use of mouth guards. According to the Academy of Sports Dentistry, basketball is considered one of the highest-risked sports for facial and head injuries. In fact, when mouth guards are not worn routinely when playing basketball, 34 percent of injuries are orofacial. Furthermore, the National Youth Sports Foundation for the Prevention of Athletic Injuries, Inc. reports that dental injuries are the most common type of orofacial injury sustained during participation in sports. Victims of total tooth avulsions who do not have teeth properly preserved or replanted can face thousands of dollars in dental costs per tooth and many hours in the dentist’s chair. The MDS strongly urges the MIAA to mandate the mouth guard requirement for soccer. The National Federation Sports Medicine Committee is currently reviewing the adoption of a requirement for mouth guards in soccer and basketball. Research studies are documented that currently support mandatory use. Sports Medical Committee members welcome the opportunity to present their rationale to committees upon request. Mouth guards for Soccer and Basketball are necessary protective equipment

5/23/2013 26

The MIAA presently highly recommends mouth guards be worn during practice and game situations in the sports of soccer and basketball. The Sports Medicine Committee of the MIAA has reviewed the research and statistics and concludes that the use of mouth guards will prevent or greatly reduce the chance of the athletes suffering tooth damage or loss, jaw fractures, TMJ problems or damage to the lips, tongue and cheeks. Organizations that recommend mouth guards for basketball and soccer include the American Dental Association, Massachusetts Dental Society, The Academy for Sports Dentistry, Massachusetts Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, National Athletic Trainers Association, National Youth Safety Foundation, National Association of Secondary School Principals and the National Federation. The current cost to have a fractured tooth bonded is approximately $300. If the tooth needs a veneer or crown the cost is $1200-$1500. The national average for longevity of these restorations is 5-10 years; therefore over a lifetime of a high school student athlete a fractured tooth may cost $8500-$15,000 a tooth. If the tooth needs a root canal, the added fee is $1000-$1200. If a tooth is lost and an implant is placed the fee for the bone preservation, implant surgery, and restoration is approximately $5000. A properly fitted custom mouth guard is the best type for protection, comfort, breathing and speech, but any mouth guard will give much more protection than none at all. The cost of a mouth guard is minimal. The Massachusetts Dental Society has a program called “Grin and Wear It” in which dentists have agreed to make mouth guards at a reduced fee. Access to further information about this program is on the MIAA webpage.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Soccer Committee 1-19-0 Rejected Sports Medicine Committee 9-1-0 Approved Game Officials Committee 2-6-0 Rejected TMC 6-8-0 Rejected District B 6-8-0 Rejected District C 0-5-0 Rejected District F 0-6-0 Rejected MSSADA 2-12-0 Rejected MIAA Board of Directors 0-9-0 Rejected MIAC 2-9-0 Rejected 23. Page 79

Part V, Rule 80.1.1 – 80.3: Tennis By: Clifford John Holt II, Teacher/Coach Current: 80.1.1 All matches are to be decided on the basis of best two out of three sets with the 12-point tie-breaker

when a set reaches 6-6 in games. (Local conditions may cause an adjustment of this rule by prior mutual consent).

80.1.2 Team contests will consist of three singles and two doubles matches with seven participants taking

part. No player may play more than once in the same team match under any circumstances. (If fewer than seven players are available for a match, line-ups will be determined on the basis of most number of participants, and least number of points forfeited as prescribed in Rule 80.2.3. Any league may have the option of increasing the number of single matches to four or five in league contests only.

5/23/2013 27

80.1.3 Players are to be played in order of ability: i.e., the first and second singles players will be the two best players on the team actually engaging in the match, and the best player will play number one and the second best player will play number two. The third singles player will be representative, and the two doubles teams will be played in order of their ability. Written line-ups must be exchanged prior to the warm-up period of each team match, and coaches must be able to provide the basis/justification of their team line-ups, clearly indicating exactly why their individual players and doubles teams are playing in the order they are listed on the line-up. This basis/justification should include, but is not limited to, written records, including dates and scores, of two-of-three set or 8-game pro set challenge matches. (Violation of this rule will result in match forfeiture of that team's point or points affected by the violation).

80.1.4 Coaching, by the high school team coach only, is allowed on side changes during the entire match

except after the first game of each set and during a tie-break game. Coaching may not interfere with the USTA rule governing side changes which states as follows:

When the players change ends at the end of a game, a maximum of ninety (90) seconds are allowed. However, after the first game of each set and during a tie-break game, play shall be continuous and the players shall change ends without a rest. The maximum time starts from the moment that one point finishes until the first service is struck for the next point.

80.1.5 Only participating players are allowed within the playing area while a match is in progress. 80.1.6 There will be no more than a five minute time delay for any injury affecting an individual player. If

a player is unable to continue a match (a match to be considered as starting with the first serve), that match shall be forfeited in the team score.

80.1.7 Preceding a match, the visiting team shall have a 15 minute warm-up period with the courts at their

disposal; each player or doubles team will subsequently have a five minute warm-up with their respective opponents before the match commences. All practice serves shall be taken by all players during the warm-up period.

80.1.8 The home team shall be responsible for providing at least 15 new USLTA-approved balls for every

varsity team match. Low pressure balls are not acceptable. 80.1.9 The home coach is responsible for proper spectator deportment. 80.1.10 The home coach should make provisions to have water available within the playing enclosure for all

players. 80.1.11 If a player becomes incapacitated during the warm-up period, a substitution may be made as long as

the substitution conforms to all rules enunciated herein. If not, the point must be forfeited in the team score.

80.1.12 Each coach is responsible for his/her own team members, whether they are players or spectators. 80.2 Clarification of terms: 80.2.1 "Prior consent" means that a coach must inform the opposing coach at least 24 hours in advance of a

scheduled match as to the conditions causing a request for an adjustment. 80.2.2 "Representative" means that the player is one of the best seven players available for the match. 80.2.3 The prescribed arrangement for playing a match when one team has fewer than seven players is:

5/23/2013 28

Number of

Players Points

Played Points

Forfeited

3 1st singles 1st doubles 3 2nd singles 2nd doubles 3 3rd singles 4 1st singles 2nd doubles 4 2nd singles 3rd singles 4 1st doubles 5 1st singles 2nd doubles 5 2nd singles 5 3rd singles 5 1st doubles 6 1st singles 3rd singles 6 2nd singles 6 1st doubles 6 2nd doubles

80.3 No competitor or team in tennis will be allowed to compete without wearing a proper uniform that

has the school’s name and/or insignia.

Proposal: 5 Singles / 2 Doubles points OR 4 Singles points / 3 Doubles points

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Players would be allowed to play both singles and doubles in a given match.

Doubles would go out first playing an 8-game Pro-set. • Playing a 12 point tie-breaker at 7-7 in games.

Singles would play two sets, in the event of split sets a standard 12 point tie-breaker would decide outcome. (a Super-Tie-Breaker could be used also, first to ten by two)

Singles would go out as soon as both players were available. If a singles player was playing doubles and their opponent for singles was not, than they would take the court as soon as doubles finished.

Rational:

1. Increase participation 2. Simplify the ladder process 3. Model the College Format 4. Give players an opportunity to play both Doubles and Singles

Currently we are forced to play our best players at the 1 and 2 spot in the line-up, this often has a negative effect on our team when a player is injured or not present for a match. Doubles teams are broken-up to accommodate this rule, (i.e. A member of the 1st Doubles team now needs to play singles) while documentation is required to justify the doubles teams that may have never played together or perhaps have never played the (teammates) team they are playing ahead of in the doubles line-up. This has caused issues in the past.

Teams would not have to use their singles players in the double matches. A team could get 9 players into a match now instead of 7 (10 players with the 4/3 option).

For smaller schools this would allow teams, in many cases, to avoid forfeiting points.

5/23/2013 29

A team could compete with only 5 players (6 players with the 4/3 option).

Both of these changes would help avoid the issues of Title IX, regarding the many boys playing on girls teams in Western MA.

This change would cut down on the illegal line-up issues “stacking” that have come up in the past. I believe that every team has established a singles ladder; however a true doubles ladder is almost impossible for many coaches to create. One reason is limited practice time or space, but the most difficult one is the fact that the same player, in many cases, will be part of multiple doubles teams. A challenge match for doubles is often difficult because it could be the 7th team on a ladder challenging the 1st team, simply because teams 2 – 6 consist of the same players that make-up teams 1-6. Since a singles ladder is much easier to establish, challenge matches are easier to accommodate.

Note: If a team has 10 players 45 possible doubles combinations are possible.

This is also better for high school tennis because some players (many USTA ranked) have decided to not play High School tennis because they are forced to play singles exclusively. The vast majority of high school tennis players that go on to play in College are called upon to play doubles or both doubles and singles in college. Colleges use a 6 Singles/ 3 Doubles format. In D1 they count winning two out of three doubles matches as 1 point, but in D3 they count each doubles point as a team point. Currently New Hampshire uses the exact D3 college format playing six singles matches that follow the three doubles matches. NH uses 8 game pro-sets for all points.

With the inability to repeat in the line-up, while forcing the “best player(s) actually engaging in the match” to play at first and second singles, you are discounting the necessary skill set of a doubles player in tennis. Doubles strategy is extremely different than singles strategy, and because of that requires a different skill set all together. I have coached players that are excellent at both singles and doubles. Example: Maya K. Hart (Amherst Public Schools class of 2012) is the defending MIAA Individuals State Champion, and she will attend Williams College in the Fall and play Doubles for her entire career. Maya was recruited as a Doubles Player and is a better doubles player than a singles player. I have coached players that are excellent Doubles players, but can not cover the entire court in singles or have inconsistent ground strokes. I have coached players that are outstanding singles players but can not hit a volley or an overhead. Example: Julianna Gensheimer (Amherst Public Schools class of 2011) saved 8 championship points this past Spring in the Western MA Finals, she had a great career playing all three singles positions for Amherst. Whenever I put her in a doubles match she would miss volleys and ultimately limit her partners’ success with both her inability to hit a volley and her inability to avoid setting-up the opposing net player. If you are not familiar with the sport it would seem that a good singles tennis player would be a good doubles tennis player, but that is not the case. Strategy, teamwork and net play are essential skills needed to be a good doubles player. The teamwork and net play components are not vital to a successful singles player.

An attempt to relate this rule to other sports, and show how other athletes are afforded more opportunity, based on limited restrictions.

Football: If Football players were only allowed to play one side of the ball that would clearly limit their ability to get noticed by College coaches, for example see Lofa Tatupu from King Philip class of 2001. If he was limited to one side of the ball in 2000 – 2001 seasons, it would have been QB not LB, and then it is unlikely that he would have even been recruited at all. Lofa went on to USC were he won two National Championships and has gone on to being a 3-time Pro Bowl selection in the NFL.

5/23/2013 30

Track and field: Players are allowed to enter multiple events to showcase different abilities and skill sets.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Tennis Committee 0-9-0 Rejected TMC 0-13-1 Rejected District B 0-14-0 Rejected District C 0-5-0 Rejected District F 0-6-0 Rejected MSSADA 0-14-0 Rejected MIAA Board of Directors 0-9-0 Rejected MIAC 0-11-0 Rejected 24. Page 81 Part V, Rule 81.2 - Volleyball

By: David Stratton, Athletic Director, Agawam High School, on behalf of the PVIAC

Current: All varsity competitions will be three out of five sets, played to 25 points utilizing rally scoring, and will count toward the season and weekly schedule limit. The fifth varsity set will be played to 15 points. Junior varsity competitions will be two out of three sets, played to 25 points utilizing rally scoring, with the third set played to 25 points, and will count toward the season and weekly schedule limit.

Proposal: The proposal is to add the following as the last sentence of rule 81.2:

Individual leagues/conferences are allowed to include a by-law or rule that increases the number of total junior varsity sets per match to three, regardless of the outcome of the first two sets.

Rationale:

To allow individual conferences the ability to add a local rule that guarantees a third junior varsity set regardless of the outcome of the first two sets. With a stratified number of sets, it is easier for junior varsity coaches to ensure maximum participation and increase student-athlete involvement.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Volleyball Committee 11-0-0 Approved Game Officials Committee 8-0-0 Approved TMC 14-0-0 Approved District B 9-5-0 Approved District C 5-0-0 Approved District F 6-0-0 Approved MSSADA 14-0-0 Approved MIAA Board of Directors 9-0-0 Approved MIAC 11-0-0 Approved

25. Page 108

Part IX, Rule 95.3.2: Tournament Eligibility By: Maureen M. Sullivan

Current:

In leagues where a team's schedule is comprised of more than seventy percent (70%) of higher division schools, and there is no small and large breakout, all league and non-league contests played against equal and/or lower divisions may solely be considered in the fifty percent (50%) qualifying

5/23/2013 31

criteria. Schools may also access the 70% tournament qualifying opportunity if a league is aligned by enrollment BUT the league requires cross-scheduling to the extent that at least 70% of the school’s total required opponents are in a higher tournament division.

Proposal:

If a team’s league schedule (those games that count in determining the league champion) is comprised of more than 70% of higher division teams, all league and non-league contests played against equal and/or lower divisions will be considered in the 50 % qualifying criteria.

Rational:

In 1995 I proposed a rule change that would grant tournament qualification equity for teams, where because of the disparity of the league school sizes, did not exist. At that time there were 27 schools statewide that played more than 70% of their league schedule against higher opponents. After careful review and discussion, the MIAA passed the rule and entered it into the blue book in 1997. For the past 15 years, hundreds of student athletes have had the opportunity to experience post-season play and some have even won a state championship with the application of this rule.

However over the years, two things have happened, many leagues have created large and small break outs, affording some of the original 27 schools tournament qualifications equity and the MIAA has made several editorial revisions and additions to Rule 95.3.2 making it difficult to understand and apply.

It is for this reason I have rewritten the rule in a way coaches and athletic directors will find easier to understand and apply if applicable. I believe with this wording, schools which are still in a smaller division with larger schools as well as schools in leagues that sometime in the future decide to count crossover games in league standings will find relief, but other schools will not be able to manipulate their schedules to obtain multiple tournament qualification opportunities under this rule.

REVIEWING BODY ACTION: Baseball Committee 1-9-0 Rejected Basketball Committee 0-22-0 Rejected Cross Country & Track Committee 2-9-4 Rejected Boys' Lacrosse Committee 2-4-6 Rejected Field Hockey Committee 6-0-4 Approved Football Committee 0-9-2 Rejected Girls' Lacrosse Committee 0-3-10 Rejected Golf Committee 4-5-1 Rejected Gymnastics Committee 11-0-1 Approved Ice Hockey Committee 8-4-0 Approved Soccer Committee 1-18-1 Rejected Softball Committee 2-11-0 Rejected Swimming & Diving Committee 0-9-2 Rejected Tennis Committee 6-2-1 Approved Volleyball Committee 0-9-1 Rejected TMC 0-14-0 Rejected District B 5-9-0 Rejected District C 0-5-0 Rejected District F 0-6-0 Rejected MSSADA 0-14-0 Rejected MIAA Board of Directors 8-1-0 Approved MIAC 2-9-0 Rejected