As one who has a history of criticizing the ASA rule book on editorial grounds (everything from poking fun to expressing annoyance to pointing out what I think are actual problems with understandable writing), I want to say that even IF it was realistic to ask for a complete editorial re-write of the ASA book, I don't think it is necessary, AND I don't think it can be assumed it would be an improvement.
Making the rule book too situation-specific in the name of clarity turns it into a case book. We have one of those, and it is quite good (but it does need to be re-numbered in rule 8 - it's been years, now, guys - and it does need to have someone or several someones whose job is to review the case book each year for consistency with the rules changes).
As to the issue of clarity / purpose of the rule, those kinds of things can be effectively addressed in the RS/POE section.
In one of my poking fun comments about the ASA rule book, can anyone answer the question of whether a pitcher is required to pitch before the end of the inning and cite the rule?
