No bat restrictions?

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by WestMichiganBlue

A tournament organization uses ASA rules and ASA umpires. Their published tournament rules state, "There are no bat restrictions."

That means that we have to allow bats that are illegal by ASA standards. Do you feel comfortable with this from a liability standpoint? Would you work believing the tournament organization has assumed the liability? Or would you refuse to work?

WMB

Does "published tournament rules" include wording of absolute clarity that "non-legal" bats are allowed or just that that tournament has no additions? We all know about assuming anything, so will they take liability in writing or with agreement of insurance company or lawyer.

[wadeintothem]

If the commish is sanctioning it and hence I think my ASA insurance would cover it (I would find out to be sure), I could care less.

If no ASA insurance - nope, I wouldnt work it.

I have no "moral qualms" about ASA bat rules. I enforce it only because thats my job.