[Football1]

Is it really that bad in other area's where the officials have such a short trigger in football! I see the skirmishes all the time in football and the officials do an excellent job in handling it. I was on the sidelines 3 years ago (Gold Charger can add to this, I think he was there), for the Campbell County / Clark County game. The game was chippy throughout, but the officials had done a decent job of controlling things. A play on the GRC sidelines after a tackle of a Camel receiver ignited into a brawl. Coaches did an awesome job clearing the field as quickly as possible and order was restored, but it resulted in 2 player ejections! This was a brawl that both benches cleared, yet only the two players who initiated it got tossed. Rules only required the players to sit one game! IMO, sitting one game was not enough. Yes, the coaches had to power to dictate more, but we are talking about a brawl! Those actions are not acceptable and a more stern punishment can be understood for these types of actions.

I hate the power of government, but we put those in charge of our lives in a democratic way. Well, this rule was not put in place by the KHSAA! The KHSAA must put this before a vote, thus this was done in a democratic way. There may be those who do not like the rule, but obviously the very schools in which the athletes we are crying foul for, are the ones who accept this rule and wanted it put into action. If there are truly those who are in disagreement of this rule, I suggest starting with your AD. But, my guess is if a poll was done after inquiries to AD's were made, 90% would say that their AD did not support the rule. Yet, we know that more than 50% had to in order for it to even pass!

in the case you describe I too agree one game might have been too light. The problem with this rule is that it takes As much away from the kid who got ejected for a shove as it does the one who throws a punch.