4 hours ago, 24Rocks said:

Yes, the first one was for something on the Lex Cath sideline and the second had something to do with his mouthpiece. That's the extent of what information has been made available. A bit light on the details.

What you said is how the Saturday LexHerald reported it. First unsportsmanlike was for unspecified (?) action on the sideline. 2nd was for his reaction when an official ordered him off the field for one play because his mouthpiece was out. Hmmmmm?

38 minutes ago, Oldercoach said:

What you said is how the Saturday LexHerald reported it. First unsportsmanlike was for unspecified (?) action on the sideline. 2nd was for his reaction when an official ordered him off the field for one play because his mouthpiece was out. Hmmmmm?

The "mouthpiece" and how they are used, not used, etc. is becoming exhausting, across all levels.

11 hours ago, Pi said:

The "mouthpiece" and how they are used, not used, etc. is becoming exhausting, across all levels.

"Exhaustive', what are you suggesting? Forget enforcing the rule? Or, enforcing the rule is a given 100% of the time....QED?

1 hour ago, Oldercoach said:

"Exhaustive', what are you suggesting? Forget enforcing the rule? Or, enforcing the rule is a given 100% of the time....QED?

Enforcing it 100% or not enforcing it at all. Picking and choosing is the exhausting part of it.

2 hours ago, DearToday said:

Enforcing it 100% or not enforcing it at all. Picking and choosing is the exhausting part of it.

Agreed. In college football, players having a mouthpiece hanging from their faceguard and never using it. What's the point of the rule?

2 hours ago, DearToday said:

Enforcing it 100% or not enforcing it at all. Picking and choosing is the exhausting part of it.

Any ref that doesn't enforce it should be suspended.

5 minutes ago, Maroon Beech said:

Agreed. In college football, players having a mouthpiece hanging from their faceguard and never using it. What's the point of the rule?

IMO it's just something extra for the refs to look for, when I'd rather the refs be looking at the game. I'll never forget we were playing a youth league team when I was in fifth grade, they threw a double pass to win with no time and the play got called back for no mouth piece in for the kid that scored. Brutal!

1 minute ago, theguru said:

Any ref that doesn't enforce it should be suspended.

Agreed! But unfortunately that won't happen.

4 minutes ago, DearToday said:

Agreed! But unfortunately that won't happen.

That is an officiating integrity issue for the KHSAA to sort out.

11 minutes ago, Maroon Beech said:

Agreed. In college football, players having a mouthpiece hanging from their faceguard and never using it. What's the point of the rule?

Silly, but quite a few have two mouthpieces. One to wear and one to hang. When you see one hanging, usually there is a second in their mouth. Don't ask me why that became the cool thing to do. To me, it just draws unnecessary attention to yourself.

I guess I just never thought I'd see the mouthpiece be part of a fashion statement in football. When they are just dangling, with colors that don't match school colors, it's pretty lame to me.

On 9/4/2026 at 11:58 PM, FrankNicodemus said:

Thanks for the research! I feel like this has appeal written all over it, like the over turned red card for the US World Cup player. Therefore I'll believe that he isn't playing when he shows up on Friday in the Fort with street clothes on 😀. Until then let the theories fly!!!

If there is an appeal, it is certainly not out of the realm of possibilities that the KHSAA has a ruling overturned. Ironically, Boyle was also involved in another game, years ago, where the KHSAA overstepped and erred with their decision to suspend Highlands player Mike Mitchell from the state title game, preventing him from playing in the biggest game of his high school career. The KHSAA decision was later overturned by the Kentucky courts. The judicial review found that the KHSAA had acted arbitrarily and capriciously in suspending Mitchell. Highlands ended up winning, with Mitchell on the sideline, defeating Boyle 22-6. The KHSAA also tried to make Highlands forfeit all of the games that Mitchell played in that year (2004). Highlands also won the court battle to have those wins reinstated.

How important is this game to win for Highlands with this being a potential rematch in the playoffs? Does Highland show their total offense or do they save something for a later date ?

1 minute ago, QBH said:

How important is this game to win for Highlands with this being a potential rematch in the playoffs? Does Highland show their total offense or do they save something for a later date ?

IMO, Boyle is a Signature win and Highlands will be going all out for the victory. I don't think they will hang their hats on a potential post season matchup.

I never liked the mouthpiece that hooked onto the face mask. If the helmet gets ripped off, it could cause damage to the teeth or even remove some teeth, most likely to occur when the helmet is removed by the facemask backwards.