[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Sorry, doesn't work. The cited comment was a personal opinion/observation, not a rule or law involving the umpire. When a roster is signed, the guardian or person responsible agree to play the game by ASA rules. Therefore, the guardian is accepting responsibility for the minor.

If you want to argue who has the right to make a decision, there is no ASA rule requiring the umpire to be responsible for the player and, unless decreed by law, is not acting in loco parentis. Therefore, the umpire has no more authority to make a decision on the wearing of jewelry than the minor. The only decision making authority the umpire has is whether said jewelry is dangerous. And since none of us have passed the National Safety Council's Dangerous Jewelry in Softball Seminar, the issue is totaly subjective which means it carries little to no weight legally.

What the heck are you talkin bout willis?

Your comment makes no sense whatsoever to my argument. Maybe for my argument, but I'm not sure why you are addressing it to me.