Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
I have a great deal of respect for Camron too, but I also disagree with him on this point. He makes a good argument based upon the spirit and intent of the rules, however, I find it unconvincing. I believe that this is a case of when the black and white, clearly written rule must be applied.
|
From the language of case book play 3.2SitB--"A1 may be replaced without penalty as illness or injury is considered to be an extenuating and unavoidable situation which permits a substitution".
Sure sounds to me also that the spirit and intent of the rule is exactly what Camron said. If there's a sub available, let' em in.