|
Thu Dec 06, 2012, 12:51am
|
|||
|
|||
|
One I would like my logic checked on:
If a player is directed to leave the game for excessive blood on the uniform the blood can be wiped off and the player may re-enter at the first opportunity. 3-3-4 says ....next opportunity to substitute after the clock has been properly started properly following his/her replacement. 3-3-7 says ....uniform...is appropriately cleaned. I say the answer is false because "next opportunity" is not enough information and "wiped" is not "appropriately cleaned". How is my logic? 
|
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| NHSF "intentional" vs NCAA "flagarent" terminology | Duffman | Basketball | 17 | Wed Feb 08, 2012 10:15pm |
| Is "the patient whistle" and "possession consequence" ruining the game? | fiasco | Basketball | 46 | Fri Dec 02, 2011 08:43am |
| How "head" is a post-ejection assistant coach | Back In The Saddle | Basketball | 6 | Thu Oct 02, 2008 11:30am |
| ABC's "Nightline" examines "worst calls ever" tonight | pizanno | Basketball | 27 | Fri Jul 04, 2008 06:08am |
| "Rules Myths" questions | TwoBits | Baseball | 13 | Tue Jan 08, 2008 07:25pm |
Threaded Mode
