Quote:
Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)
Jeff,
Could you please clarify? I haven't the foggiest idea of what situations you are referring to or where I would find a supporting cite.
Thanks.
John
|
Well you can look at all the casebook plays under 3.3.1 and it is clear that the rule makes it clear that the actions of an assistant can restrict a HC to the dugout. And the intent of the rule is to make the HC restricted and not allow a coach to be on the field if such action is taken under this new rule. And there are people that have said that "It would not be a good thing to have a coach not on the field" when the rule is clear that is the result if this rule is violated.
I do think the rule is unclear on some levels, but it is clear to me the NF wanted this penalty to be severe so the HC could prevent assistants from getting out of hand.
Peace