Interesting scenario question

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by umpjim

So if you have to tell a player to take off jewelry you have unfairly affected the game. But I get where you are coming from. I do baseball and nit shit rules do not affect the fairness of a game in my neck of the woods.

While I understand the rationale behind the NFHS jewelry rule, I don't paticularly like the "see what we can get away with" attidute making it the umpire's responsibility seems to engender.

NFHS's rules questionnaire asks about a rule proposal to restrict the coach for any violation of "properly and legally equipped" discovered after the plate meeting (question wording heavily paraphrased...). I answered that I would favor such a rule. My reasoning is to place more of the burden on the coach, where (IMO) it properly belongs.