Quote:
Originally posted by greymule
2. OLD RULE: Coach: A coach not in his team's uniform "may go onto the field to attend a player." (3.2.1d)
NEW RULE: Coach: He may enter the field "if one of his or her players is ill or injured."
The change could simply be to insert "his or her," just to show how non-sexist they are. Or maybe it's to specify that a coach not in uniform cannot go onto the field to tend to an opposing player. Maybe there were a lot of problems with that happening. If you were a coach, would you want an opposing coach tending to an ill or injured player on your team if that coach was not wearing the uniform of his or her team?
|
I would speculate that the intent of the change is to tighten up and be specific about when and why a coach may enter the field, by taking the general statement "to attend to a player" and making it the more specific "if one of his or her players is ill or injured." Perhaps the rulesmakers were hearing reports of coaches "abusing" the privilege and conducting strategy sessions under the ruse that they were "attending to a player." With the new clarification, the umpire can require more concrete evidence that the player being attended to is actually ill or injured.
Just idle speculation, of coure, but it seems more logical to me than simply to be making the statement gender neutral, which they didn't completely anyway.