[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Did I say THAT? Hold on, let me go check...

....OK I'm back. Nope, didn't say that. I said "Time unspecified".

And the difference is? "No time limit" and "no time limit specified" are pretty much equivalent in our context, aren't they?

I hesitate to say this because I'm sure it's a trick question...but here goes...he'll be ready to play when he's in the building and sitting on the bench, will he not?

Yes, of course. No dispute. (In fact, you realize, I hope, that there's no actual dispute here at all, right? You and I are going to handle this exactly the same way, regardless of whether we agree on the exact wording of the rule.)

The rule does not specify that he MUST be dressed and ready to play WHEN his name goes in the book.

But it does seem to specify that. You have to submit the roster at a certain time. And the roster has to have team members on it. If you're not dressed and eligible to become a player when the roster is submitted, how can you be a team member?

It does not specify the time during or prior to the game WHEN he must be dressed and ready to play (time unspecified).

So it could be 1968?

there's no penalty defined for a coach who puts a name in the book because he thinks a kid *might* be dressed and ready to play but never shows up.

True, but that doesn't mean it's allowed. There's no penalty for wearing earrings, but you're not allowed to play with them in.

Again, the loophole is that the rule doesn't prohibit non-team-members from being in the book. So this whole discussion is moo. (It's like a cow's opinion. It's a moo point. -- Joey Tribbiani) But if the loophole weren't there, I think we might have to say that only the players at the site could go in the book.