Not exactly a ringing endorsement.MissyQ said:Thats where I was going with it, plus if you write the rules and train the refs, you certainly don't have to expose yourself so clumsily, even if Chuck were inclined to do so, which I don't believe he is.
I think you will see the rulebook used in a clearer way, with fewer 'interpretation issues', as he wrote most of them, and was present in the making of all of them.
One might infer it's been seen as an "issue" in the past then.
Aight, Martin, think it thru. Who is chiefly responsible for the latest reunficiation mutterings? Three guesses. (And three answers actually.)