Quote:
Originally posted by M&M Guy
As much as it pains me to side with a Yankee fan, I have to agree with Dan. Knowing the rule is important, but knowing why the rule exists is just as important. Obviously the rule is intended for the safety of the player and their toes. But if they don't have toes to protect, what is the purpose of the shoes? Here's a question for those rule-savvy officials: if the player ties the shoes around his belt, then would the shoes be considered jewlery?
Common sense should prevail. I would bet the previous games' officials did notice, and had used common sense. Yes, I think the coaching staff and parents should've also followed through, but it still falls on the officials on this one.
|
um... but if this kid had artificial legs, then those legs
would have to be approved by the state association
and an authorization statement would
have to be available to the referee.
Why couldn't the same procedure have been followed in this case?
The game officials obviously had some liability concerns. They also really didn't have anything available to alleviate those concerns. So.....are you talking about an OOO here or are you talking about an official with some legitimate liability concerns? Big difference imo.