Argumentative Coach on Substitution

[huh?]

c'mon, you know better than that cecil - otherwise the original poster would not have mentioned the coach "clearly dissenting" in his initial post, and nvref would not have given this bit of insight into himself:

"The coach generally wants to selectively apply certain details of the rules when it suits him.
While I truly feel that this is a petty, little game which some coaches play, it does warrant some discussion because it is purely rules based.

Well, I'm pretty good with the rules book, so if the coach wants to play that game, I have no problem with it. He just better be prepared for me to hit him with every detail of it in return! In the long run this is a battle that the coach is going to lose."

We have one official here who admits to being willing to play little games with a coach, rather than taking the high road. We also have another who admits to allowing a coach to clearly dissent, then get upset with the coach (who clearly did not understand this part of the book) over a substitution technicality.

I say again, sorry, just not the approach for me.