T. Kenji Sugahara

If someone could come up with draft language on this, it would be appreciated.

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 10:17 AM, Mike Murray via OBRA_Officials
wrote:
> Although it is certainly true that concussions are a serious issue and a
> bigger deal than what used to be thought, I think that the pendulum is
> swinging in the opposite direction creating fear of head injury in excess of
> what is needed. I shouldn't complain as I benefit from this a bit. It is
> pretty much a daily event for people to come into our clinic at the ski area
> concerned that they might have a concussion despite giving a very clear
> description of the injury and not having any concussion symptoms.
>
>
>
> In this vein, second impact syndrome is certainly a serious problem but this
> is mostly an issue for contact sports and the 50% and 100% are probably
> overstated. I am not aware of a single episode of second impact syndrome in
> a bike racer in OR in the past 35 years. Actually concussions, though not
> unheard of, are fairly uncommon. Many riders have had concussions but the
> number seen by the OBRA first aid providers each year is small. There have
> been a few cases where concussed riders have continued but in the vast
> majority of cases riders with head injuries pull themselves from the race.
> The issue for contact sports is return to play shortly or even immediately
> after head injuries. Generally this is not an issue in bike racing.
>
>
>
> I agree that the formal rule support for removing a rider due to injury,
> which shouldn't really be limited to head injury, is weak. Practically this
> is not generally a problem as I cannot think of a single case where an
> injured rider was asked to withdraw and then complained. I do remember an
> episode of just the opposite. A rider that had an unremarkable slow speed
> fall at the start of a race complained he was not stopped when he later
> didn't have any recall for most of the race. We had to point out to him that
> he had behaved entirely normally during the race and that performing
> concussion screening in all fallen riders would practically result in all
> fallen riders being removed from competition as the time it would take to do
> the screen would keep them from getting back in.
>
>
>
> I would suggest that someone propose a rule that would address removal of a
> rider identified with not only head injuries but also other injuries and
> mechanical problems that would prohibit continuing safely. The rule should
> not mandate that officials do any type of examination but should be
> permissive to allow removal of unsafe riders.
>
>
>
>
>
> Mike Murray
>
> Sent from mobile device
>
>
> On Jan 4, 2016, at 07:12, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> At our new official training workshop, we have training on concussions.
> Athletes who experience a second impact after an initial concussion have
> nearly a 50% mortality rate and almost a 100% disability rate. To allow a
> rider who may have a concussion to continue to participate is irresponsible.
> Based on the training, it seems clear and appropriate that officials should
> pull riders suspected of having a concussion even if the rider does not want
> to be pulled.
>
>
>
> Judgments of this nature must often be made by Assistant Referees since, in
> most cases, it will be impossibly to consult with the CR prior to making the
> call. It is also an irreversible call (removal from competition), since the
> rider cannot appeal the decision prior to it being enforced. Although this
> is not a penalty and is really a rider safety issue, it will feel like a
> penalty a racer who disagree with being pulled.
>
>
>
> From reviewing the rules, I���m not sure that pulling riders for theirs and
> others safety (as opposed to a rule violation) is well supported.
>
>
>
> Here is my summary of what I���ve found:
>
> �� 3.5.1 Chief Referee (Duties)
>
> o make the final decision in any case or appeal not specifically covered
> by these rules. Any such decision is beyond appeal.
>
> o if necessary, alter the conditions of any race in the interest of
> safety, including cancellation of a race if necessary.
>
> o Note: pretty vague and only applies to the CR, not ARs
>
>
>
> �� 15.1.2 General Rules (Road Racing)
>
> o Any rider who is out of contention may be asked to withdraw by the Chief
> Referee.
>
> o Note: The rider might not always be out of contention, and it will often
> be an AR. Only applies to road events.
>
> o Also 15.4.4 Riders out of contention (Criteriums)
>
>
>
> �� 15.7.2 Immediate disqualification (Road Racing Penalties)
>
> o A Chief Referee may empower referees to immediately disqualify riders
> during racing.
>
> o Note: This is not a penalty, it is a rider safety issue. Only applies to
> road events.
>
>
>
> Am I missing something obvious in the rules that would allow pulling riders
> in these situations?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Seth
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>

--
Kenji Sugahara
Executive Director
Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
Phone: 503-278-5550
http://www.obra.org

Mike Murray

Although it is certainly true that concussions are a serious issue and a
bigger deal than what used to be thought, I think that the pendulum is
swinging in the opposite direction creating fear of head injury in excess
of what is needed. I shouldn't complain as I benefit from this a bit. It is
pretty much a daily event for people to come into our clinic at the ski
area concerned that they might have a concussion despite giving a very
clear description of the injury and not having any concussion symptoms.

In this vein, second impact syndrome is certainly a serious problem but
this is mostly an issue for contact sports and the 50% and 100% are
probably overstated. I am not aware of a single episode of second impact
syndrome in a bike racer in OR in the past 35 years. Actually concussions,
though not unheard of, are fairly uncommon. Many riders have had
concussions but the number seen by the OBRA first aid providers each year
is small. There have been a few cases where concussed riders have continued
but in the vast majority of cases riders with head injuries pull themselves
from the race. The issue for contact sports is return to play shortly or
even immediately after head injuries. Generally this is not an issue in
bike racing.

I agree that the formal rule support for removing a rider due to injury,
which shouldn't really be limited to head injury, is weak. Practically this
is not generally a problem as I cannot think of a single case where an
injured rider was asked to withdraw and then complained. I do remember an
episode of just the opposite. A rider that had an unremarkable slow speed
fall at the start of a race complained he was not stopped when he later
didn't have any recall for most of the race. We had to point out to him
that he had behaved entirely normally during the race and that performing
concussion screening in all fallen riders would practically result in all
fallen riders being removed from competition as the time it would take to
do the screen would keep them from getting back in.

I would suggest that someone propose a rule that would address removal of a
rider identified with not only head injuries but also other injuries and
mechanical problems that would prohibit continuing safely. The rule should
not mandate that officials do any type of examination but should be
permissive to allow removal of unsafe riders.

Mike Murray

Sent from mobile device

On Jan 4, 2016, at 07:12, Seth May via OBRA_Officials <
obra_officials@list.obra.org> wrote:

All,

At our new official training workshop, we have training on concussions.
Athletes who experience a second impact after an initial concussion have
nearly a 50% mortality rate and almost a 100% disability rate. To allow a
rider who may have a concussion to continue to participate is
irresponsible. Based on the training, it seems clear and appropriate that
officials should pull riders suspected of having a concussion even if the
rider does not want to be pulled.

Judgments of this nature must often be made by Assistant Referees since, in
most cases, it will be impossibly to consult with the CR prior to making
the call. It is also an irreversible call (removal from competition), since
the rider cannot appeal the decision prior to it being enforced. Although
this is not a penalty and is really a rider safety issue, it will feel like
a penalty a racer who disagree with being pulled.

>From reviewing the rules, I’m not sure that pulling riders for theirs and
others safety (as opposed to a rule violation) is well supported.

Here is my summary of what I’ve found:

· 3.5.1 Chief Referee (Duties)

o *make the final decision in any case or appeal not specifically covered
by these rules. Any such decision is beyond appeal. *

o *if necessary, alter the conditions of any race in the interest of
safety, including cancellation of a race if necessary.*

o *Note: *pretty vague and only applies to the CR, not ARs

· 15.1.2 General Rules (Road Racing)

o *Any rider who is out of contention may be asked to withdraw by the
Chief Referee.*

o *Note:* The rider might not always be out of contention, and it will
often be an AR. Only applies to road events.

o Also 15.4.4 Riders out of contention (Criteriums)

· 15.7.2 Immediate disqualification (Road Racing Penalties)

o *A Chief Referee may empower referees to immediately disqualify riders
during racing.*

o *Note*: This is not a penalty, it is a rider safety issue. Only applies
to road events.

Am I missing something obvious in the rules that would allow pulling riders
in these situations?

Thanks

Seth

_______________________________________________
OBRA_Officials mailing list
OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials

Seth May

All,

At our new official training workshop, we have training on concussions.
Athletes who experience a second impact after an initial concussion have
nearly a 50% mortality rate and almost a 100% disability rate. To allow a
rider who may have a concussion to continue to participate is irresponsible.
Based on the training, it seems clear and appropriate that officials should
pull riders suspected of having a concussion even if the rider does not want
to be pulled.

Judgments of this nature must often be made by Assistant Referees since, in
most cases, it will be impossibly to consult with the CR prior to making the
call. It is also an irreversible call (removal from competition), since the
rider cannot appeal the decision prior to it being enforced. Although this
is not a penalty and is really a rider safety issue, it will feel like a
penalty a racer who disagree with being pulled.

>From reviewing the rules, I'm not sure that pulling riders for theirs and
others safety (as opposed to a rule violation) is well supported.

Here is my summary of what I've found:

. 3.5.1 Chief Referee (Duties)

o make the final decision in any case or appeal not specifically covered
by these rules. Any such decision is beyond appeal.

o if necessary, alter the conditions of any race in the interest of
safety, including cancellation of a race if necessary.

o Note: pretty vague and only applies to the CR, not ARs

. 15.1.2 General Rules (Road Racing)

o Any rider who is out of contention may be asked to withdraw by the Chief
Referee.

o Note: The rider might not always be out of contention, and it will often
be an AR. Only applies to road events.

o Also 15.4.4 Riders out of contention (Criteriums)

. 15.7.2 Immediate disqualification (Road Racing Penalties)

o A Chief Referee may empower referees to immediately disqualify riders
during racing.

o Note: This is not a penalty, it is a rider safety issue. Only applies to
road events.

Am I missing something obvious in the rules that would allow pulling riders
in these situations?

Thanks

Seth