Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dakota
Yes, it would (see NFHS). ASA specifically says EXPOSED jewlery and leaves it to umpire judgment as to whether the jewlery is "dangerous." Taped over is not exposed (technically). I wish ASA would delete the entire rule and leave the issue with parents and coaches where it belongs. If they insist on having a jewlery rule, re-word it so it must be judged dangerous to OTHER players and leave out the one wearing it. Again, that is for parents and coaches (and players when old enough).
|
I agree with Dakota.
Delete the entire rule and leave the issue with parents and coaches where it belongs. The level of jewelry we see 99% of the time I would put in the 'un-dangerous' category.
In this day and age, I think it's time to re-word the rule, allow it unless it's something that could hurt the players
not wearing the piece concerned or that would be an obvious distraction to the
opposing players.
Have each club sign a form stating they understand the risks ... etc. etc..
Some of you will shriek, but we had an ump at a tourny a couple weeks ago that wore an ear-ring ... (male ump, and an older fellow ... gray hair old).