Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve
Here's the blow-by-blow as I understand it.
The NUS and Umpires Committee didn't like it, either. When it passed thru the National Council despite their opposition, it seems that, rather than attempt to implement what practically EVERYONE understood was desired, the staff showed their disdain for the rule by insisting to continue to enforce the rules that clearly contradict the intent.
The interpretations that followed, not being part of the actual rules, apparently aren't being noticed by the teams, either; so they aren't (yet) complaining to the point of generating new rules submissions. Instead, teams are just disgusted and disappointed, and repeating the mantra that USA/ASA still doesn't listen to what the constituency (teams, coaches, players) want. In some areas (Georgia is currently a great example), the teams are leaving (or minimizing) USA/ASA and being marketed strongly by the competition.
|
It should be noted that the NUS or Umpire Council do not have the authority to change rules, simply offer interpretation. For that matter, the NUS only has the number of votes as there are regions (I believe it was 15 at that time).
What interpretations developed must still fall within the limit of the rules. There is a process for an emergency ballot should there be unforeseen shortcomings or unexpected ramifications of a rule change.
Then again, it has been two years and there hasn't been any major adjustments, so I guess the council is satisfied with the way it is presently written.