![Old](images/statusicon/post_old.gif)
Mon Apr 07, 2014, 08:37pm
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve
In ASA and many other travel ball associations, umpires are responsible to refuse to allow any jewelry they consider dangerous (either to an opponent, or to the player herself). Some refuse to make any judgment, and declare any/all jewelry dangerous; others use judgment, which may vary from umpire to umpire, while most would require watches and anything dangling to be removed, leaving studs and tight earrings or necklaces alone. While your judgment can be argued, the rules allow you to avoid liability absent "gross negligence", generally described as knowing it is dangerous, and knowingly ignoring it.
|
I only worry about something which can injure another. If a parent/coach responsible for that player's life doesn't have a problem with a player wearing a stud or piercing that cannot hurt another while playing softball, I don't see where it is my place to usurp their authority.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|