| Manny A |
Wed Oct 30, 2013 10:14am |
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehair
(Post 909397)
Why does your "temper" reason for a no-collision rule have to compete for importance with the injury prevention reason for a no-collision rule. These reasons don't conflict. Unless you deny that an injury prevention reason exists (deny a testosterone-filled teenager could seriously injure another), then to say that your temper reason is more significant than the injury prevention reason is just silly.
|
I never said these two were mutually exclusive. Of course there is concern over injuries.
But I personally feel (and this is just me) that preventing confrontations was foremost on the minds of those who wrote the FPSR and other rules geared to minimize contact. I've seen these kids when they play tournaments for their Little League Seniors and Bigs teams after the high school season is over, and they realize there is no FPSR. They take full advantage of playing like the pros do, and inevitably there's taunting, pushing, shoving, etc. It happens almost every season. |
