Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy341a
What is the intent of the rule? I think it is basically the game can not be held up to tend to a bleeding player without the expense of the time out. If the blood problem can be fixed without the game being held up due to the blood problem it seems as if they shouldn't have to come out.
|
This is exactly right.
Before this rule, if there was a player bleeding or with blood on the uniform, we would stop the game, take the player to the bench and if it was minor then the trainer would stop the blood or change the uniform. Problem is that minor still held up the game for 1 minute or two and coaches would use this as an unofficial timeout to coach up the kids while the trainer fixed the blood issue. So now we don't do that. If we notice blood on a player during the game we send to the bench without otherwise delaying the game for an extended period. Common sense and knowledge of why a rule is in place, which I can tell after reading 6 pages on this topic, seems to be lacking. If the game is otherwise stopped and the problem can be fixed then great. If it can't be, we're not delaying the game further without use of a timeout or the player can sit while we play on until it is fixed.