Exposure rule

[GDawg]

Can a player be called for the exposure rule or non compliant rule for wearing their Game suit up their own butt crack,
during the time the Ref is in control of every aspect of the game his working?
According to the rules Yes, the rules mandate the Buttock be fully covered by the Suits rule. Or the suit is non compliant and the player must make the required change to be allowed to play in the game, Period.

Why then are games video taped and broadcasted via the world wide web showing Refs allowing non compliance to occur during the Biggest Game of the entire season, at the worlds biggest water polo event on the planet?
I don't understand any REAL NEED for that RULE if you don't even enforce it!!!
Take that out one MORE notch and expose the front half of the same player by again pulling the fabric provided tight enough for the front wedgy /exposure. According to the Refs interpretation of the back half of the rule it would seem like discrimination to call the front side any different, right?

Ref's who see this sort of thing all the time, please explain this rule for me or is this too taboo for discussion or proper protocol?
The way I see it, like tv censorship rules changed over the years, time marches on and like Beach Volleyball our Ladies Sports Uniforms (suits) will get Smaller and smaller if these rules are not enforced.

We can expect Euro Cut suits to become Brazilian Cut if the trend to allow Butt cheeks to fly in the face of the rules is not curtailed!
Are all exposure calls called during the Game called correctly? Most I'd say are, but what about the Female players walking around on deck with wedgies, aren't these violations too just like sharp fingernails are, or the too thin of Goalie suits straps are violations. Hmmmm?

I'd like to see clarification from this forum regarding the HBWPC vs SBWPC 18u Girl's Platinum Gold medal game at JO's 2011.
Was there any reason you don't call the Exposure Foul or Non Compliant suit violation whenthe highest Level we have Ref's see that much private part at a Game, talk about world wide exposure!!!
Thanks for taking the time.
I am in charge of the truWest R & D crack research team, no pun intended.
Just stating my Humble Opinion and need for clarity why I care to ask.

All the best,
GW

[THX-7.3]

I'm sorry Gary, but I can't find any "exposure" rule or any other rule concerning anything you are talking about. Since you seem to be the expert on suits and girl's bottoms, perhaps you could point us to the specific rule in the book that covers (or doesn't cover) such things.

Here is the book http://www.usawaterpolo.org/Libraries/G ... 09_13.sflb

Let us know.

[aselder]

The only rule in the FINA/USWP rulebook regarding suits:

WP 5.4 Players shall wear non-transparent
costumes or costumes with a separate undergarment
and before taking part in a game shall remove any
articles likely to cause injury

All the rules about strap width, zipper backs, etc.. are only in the NCAA/NFHS rulebooks.

As THX correctly points out above, the word "exposure" does not appear anywhere in the FINA/USWP rules

[GDawg]

Thanks guy's for exposing this rule glitch.
If an exclusion can be called for exposure, and it requires the Ref to kick the offending player out for 20 seconds, this is a penalty right? As in being kicked out for 20 seconds and being charged with one personal foul. If you collect three personal fouls you are not allowed to come back in the game. What is the personal foul called if not Exposure, and why do Ref's call it when this event occurs in a game? There must be a ruling, mandate, bylaw or are these just random calls made by bashful Ref's?
If there is no rule anywhere in the rule book regarding exposure, that's a problem. IMHO anyway.

This then leads me to the NFHS suit rules:
As far as the simple suit rule that can be found 5-4-1 ART.1... Players shall wear non-transparent, one-piece swim suits.
Suits shall completely cover the buttocks and breasts.
However, the NCAA and Fina rules have dropped the above coverage rule, leaving only the non-transparent rule on the books. So then that must mean at the NCAA and Fina level, the suits are still compliant even if the buttock or breast
are not fully covered, thus the fabric transparency would be a mute point. But exposure kick out's do get called at these two levels all the time. Why? There is no rule against exposure. Which must be interpreted as a suit that complies can be wedged between tight spots and fully expose what the non-transparent fabric WAS hiding, legally, and in full compliance!? This is an oxymoron for sure.

So again, I thank you for helping solve another minor glitch in our stellar sport.
Where do you find the "exposure foul kick out rule" in our current rule books? Is there such a rule yet? Written that is?

IMHO Should suits be worn as they were designed to cover private parts of the human body, or can each player choose how much exposure to allow according to their own personal preferences? Regardless of the current rules?

Rules are made to keep order, not to be broken or sometimes tolerated, Ref's must adhere to them or be waived!!!
Which is it people?

Thanks for your valuable input.

[sidelineview]

Gdawg: I think you're missing a big point of perspective when attempting to interpret the rule.

The exposure rules written for NCAA and/or NFHS were designed to punish the player who pulls the suit down, not the player who had her suit stripped, torn, etc.

It is customary for a referee to point out a problem with a suit to the player or coach and request a fix or change, not to punish the player for what may have happened beyond his or her control. While I understand your concern, I have yet to come across the issues you are describing - and I've been around the sport for 40 years.

If such a problem as you describe comes about - the first step (IMHO) would be for the referee to ask the player to correct the problem, not go to Exclusion City. If a player ignores a referee's instructions, the referee has many tools available to remedy the problem. Plus you need to realize that the referees are going to focus their attention on the game, not on the players on the bench.

[GDawg]

Thanks sidelineview for determining there is a rule!!!
I also fully understand what is being called and why, that's not my question.
You say "the rule is written for NCAA and NFHS" right?
Then, What is this rule called by number, and where do we find it, in which rule books.
No one else including myself can find what you speak of. ( you're the man)
Next,
As far as the self exposed butt cheeks, according to your attempt to interprate the rule ( what rule) I can now assume as a player, I can self adjust my own suit to fit all the way up my butt crack like a G string style right? But is it a legal/compliant adjustment of ones own suit in this self inflicted case yes, then the Ref is mandated to call the exposure foul on the self inflicter, not the opponent who they are playing against, I understand who gets the penalty, the person causing the exposure!
Since the current rules mandate non-transparent fabrics they mean that it should cover opaquely the private parts so the buttock is covered, not exposed. It then could also mean that moving the suit to self expose your private parts would not be compliant, aka non-compliant. But Refs allow it all the time, you know you've been around for 40 years, during which there had been no such rule at all. Only now you say there is such a rule, but you don't lead us to it, why not?

If you follow me so far then, even if the suit is made to cover private parts and they are, you don't have to remained fully covered if you don't want to. Thus the use of the rule is worthless, unless a Ref uses the tools to correct this issue, that would be what I'm talking about, those tools. Are the tools you speak of also a rule, or actually a tool like a shovel is a hole digging apparatus?
What specific tools do you speak of sidelineview???
Please explain yourself in more detail and lose the generalities.
Thanks too for that hard to find ambiguous rule location we've not been able to find anywhere.
I look forward to your specific credible insight.

GW

oh yeah I almost forgot "that's water polo"...

[Doru Roll]

How would a referee even see a player's wedgie in the pool? Perhaps if the player is swimming with their legs up in the air? The whole point is ridiculous and a waste of time. You seem to be spending a lot of time on the wedgie thing GDawg; perhaps you get some sort of self-gratification out of it?

[GDawg]

Doru Roll,
Refs can see a lot in the pool when water polo players are swimming forward is a second hypothetical example. On deck during time outs while being filmed or viewed by everyone including the 2 Ref's, is my specific first example though.
The player was on deck when It was filmed from the perverse low angle by the Crack Film Crew provided by USAWP at the JO'S.
I guess you missed the first part of this visual.
If suits are not allowed to be worn in wedged way in a game it's called non compliant. So if suits are allowed to be worn wedged that way on deck but not in the game that's called what? Self exposed Butt Cheeks personal preference, ok.
All we want to understand is, what exactly IS the Rule?
I find that part impossible to answer from the rules.
The non-transparent rule should cover this issue right?
It does until the suit is re adjusted to expose the part of the body the non-transparent suit had covered in full compliance.

Gun's don't kill people, people kill people. Do you understand that logic?

I don't make the rules I read them and comply to them, like laws. But if the law/rule is unwritten, then let it be said it's an unwritten rule and move on. Exposure as a rule is not yet on any water polo rule books. PERIOD.

Please advise if you know otherwise.

Thanks for your input.

Further discussion Doru Roll~ should suits be worn anyway the wearer wants to wear them? Not over their heads of course.
Do you think the rules should allow for anyone who wants to wear their suit (the way the suit was worn by the HB team member on the Internationally /Webcasted HBWPC vs SBWPC final game) exposing 98% of ones own bum as compliant?
Then a rule change from "suits must be non-transparent or a second suit must be worn underneath" is in order.
Other wise they void each other out. Right?
That's the point here.

[Doru Roll]

... Refs can see a lot in the pool...

You'll be surprised at what they do not, or choose not to see.

... I guess you missed the first part of this visual...

No, I ignored it. Along with your color commentary.

... All we want to understand is, what exactly IS the Rule?...

Evidently there is no rule to satisfy your sensibilities. Or proclivities...

... I don't make the rules I read them and comply to them, like laws. But if the law/rule is unwritten, then let it be said it's an unwritten rule and move on. Exposure as a rule is not yet on any water polo rule books. PERIOD...

Very good. Kindly move on now then, if you please.

... Please advise if you know otherwise...

I know only what's in the rule book.

... Do you think the rules should allow for anyone who wants to wear their suit (the way the suit was worn by the HB team member on the Internationally /Webcasted HBWPC vs SBWPC final game) exposing 98% of ones own bum as compliant?

I wish I understood what this means...

... That's the point here.

No, the point is I actually stopped pumping sea water and raw sewage out of my basement long enough to reply your post. I'll go back to the sewage now.

[GDawg]

D R,
You must be a water polo Ref who can't explain a call?

FYI~The part you don't understand, that's because you ignored the facts from the original post.
Sorry that you feel that way, kinda suits you anyway, maybe all I have to say is, that's alright.
I will survive.....
Move on dude.
Aloha.

[SinkOrSwim]

happy labor day weekend wishes for the Dawg-to-the-G.
Lord knows we have all labored through his postings.

[polomama23]

What is the motivation of this thread? GDawg - are you trying to manufacture a suit that is wedgie-free?

Perhaps when the girls stop wearing the suits that tight, they will be wedgie free.

I am still wondering why so much attention is being paid to the derrierre's of these young ladies. It's...creepy.

Maybe you can avert your eyes like the other 99% of the spectators do in the stands if it bothers you so much?

[GDawg]

Sorry polomama23,
The thread started by requesting what the exposure rule is?
A rule? Then where is the rule in the rule book?
An interpretation by a Ref, who calls what? a foul, no an exclusion!
If an exclusion is called and it is, Where can the ruling be found again in the rule book pertaining to this specific exclusion?
Simple stuf really till the weird chimed in...
The creepy part is when you take this no call real call and play it out in real time.People say all kinds of unrelated comments.
A suit Must cover a rear end according to the rules but a player can uncover it if they want to, ok, but that's not allowed according to the Suit/costume rule in the rule book. HMMM?
We just want to know if a player does want to wear a suit a certain way Wedgied, is it legal or not.
The rules say it is not legal, therefore it is non compliant and the player is asked to correct the non compliant suit before they can be allowed to ? a) Enter the game or b) be on the team bench at all?
Ref's don't know where the rule is exactly, that's why we are here asking that question.
Is this exposure or just non compliance, to wear a wedgified suit to a water polo game you plan to play by the rules in.
Do you know where these rules are in the current rule books in 2011?
It must be a rule somewhere, don't be creeped out by a Water Polo reality.
That's water polo.

I call this good sportsmanship when you knowingly play by all the written rules, not cheat the rules.
But IMHO if there is no rule then stop saying there is one.
Is that simple enough for the masses who love this game?
Play by the rules, don't worry about if if it's not a rule.
But don't call a phantom rule, unless it's phantom water polo that is.

I hope this takes your creep away, We never wanted that, just the Phacts.

Have an awesome season.

[kw9050]

wtf? is this guy for real?

[NCSpoloer]

wtf? is this guy for real?

You eventually learn to ignore him if you hang around long enough.