Oversight in editing? Or intentional?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

And I'm saying it is irrelevant since they were never "approved" to become "non-approved".

Parse the sentence like this.

The official bat shall be [smooth and round to 0.050 inches in diameter] and [bear either the ASA 2000 certification mark or the ASA 2004 certification mark as shown below ( in the 2010 ASA Rule Book) and must not be listed on the ASA Non Approved Bat List.]

IOW, the "must not be listed on the ASA Non Approved Bat List" applies only to those with an ASA certification mark on them which excludes all the bats to which you are referring.

That's not the "and" to which I'm referring. I'm referring to the definition of a non-approved bat:

NON-APPROVED BAT: A bat that does not meet ASA specifications and is on the current non-approved bat list.

U-Trip sticks don't appear on the non-approved list anymore as of Jan 1, 2009.

Mike, I agree with your ruling. I'm just saying that the printed definition of a non-approved bat should more accurately reflect what really is a non-approved bat.