Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shipwreck
I realize what the rule says but what I am saying is that it shouldn't have been that hard to make the two rules co-exist with each other. Besides, in this instance, rule 5 doesn't clarify anything since it is neither a dead ball or a delayed dead ball. Dave
|
Again, I will state that the wording may be a bit cloudy. However, the rule referenced in 5:1:b, to wit 7:4:11, is in fact a dead ball situation. That is why it is covered in rule 5. Redundant? Yes. Poorly worded? Yes. Reasonable to be covered under both rules? Yes.