Quote:
Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle
Interesting question indeed.
The blood rule is not a playing rule -- a violation or foul that should be called -- it's a safety rule. And if the unsafe situation ceases to exist before you can address it...why would you pursue it?
|
That was my thinking.
The blood rule requires us to stop play to address the situation. But here play is already stopped.
The time-out requirement is designed to speed up the game: in general since we have stopped play for safety reasons, we're either going to have the team use a time-out or resume play immediately. But here we didn't stop play for safety reasons, and play will resume no faster if we assess a time-out.
The time-out provision of the rule is not intended as a punishment, and it doesn't seem reasonable or fair to impose a punishment by assessing a time-out.