![]() |
|
|||
Quote:
![]()
__________________
Pope Francis |
|
|||
Quote:
And I think Nevada is wrong that tights aren't pants (for purposes of legality in this situation). I have no doubt they qualify - at least until the NFHS gets into the business of defining pants material and fit - as pants for the purposes of this rule. |
|
|||
Tights are always illegal. If players wish to participate without exposing their legs, the rules provide a means: they may wear trousers (provided that the trousers are otherwise legal).
__________________
Cheers, mb |
|
|||
mbyron...explain how tights don't meet the definition in the book of 'trousers'.
|
|
|||
They would if 'trousers' were defined in the book. They're one kind. But they're specifically prohibited by 3-5-6. That prohibition does not extend to every kind (the book uses the term 'pants/skirt' not trousers).
__________________
Cheers, mb |
|
|||
I was wrong, my bad! The rule has been enforced a little haphazardly and I made a assumption. As I said, in a VG game last week, a home player was made to remove a black headband, in the middle of a game.
|
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Fashion Police | Zoochy | Basketball | 50 | Tue Jan 09, 2007 08:12pm |
Have you had to be the fashion police? | LarryS | Basketball | 32 | Thu Nov 30, 2006 01:22am |
fashion police? | Junker | Basketball | 39 | Tue Nov 07, 2006 12:16pm |
Question for the Fashion Police | emaxos | Softball | 16 | Thu Jul 07, 2005 06:10am |
Socks? We don't need no stinkin socks!!!!!! | sm_bbcoach | Football | 6 | Mon Aug 30, 2004 03:54pm |