(01-31-2022, 01:39 AM)old spanish trail Wrote:(01-30-2022, 10:52 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(01-30-2022, 08:09 PM)DC 86 Wrote:(01-30-2022, 08:02 PM)cardcrimson Wrote:(01-30-2022, 07:47 PM)DC 86 Wrote: There's an exemption for employees of companies that are based in another state.
For those playing or attending? Easily, this could slip down the slope of politics. . ..
For those working on site but employed by an out of state entity, i.e. players and coaches in this case.
So that is also why the Minnesota coach was not sporting a mask on the sideline, I take it, a few games back? Thanks for the explanation.
Given the libertarian streak in my older age, I was surprised with how annoyed I was that the Utah coach wasn't even "pretending" with a mask (i.e., wearing one, but then lowering it to bark instructions) at the Ws game. If nothing else, it was rude - you're a guest, at least have the decency to honor host's requests.
But at least now there's an explanation for it.
[BTW, am surprised NBA doesn't have a rule for all people participating under its umbrella].
Agree re umbrella, Teejers. And, to be clear, the exception re out of state employees is included in the SF rule?
Pretty tough to have an “umbrella” rule when there are differing rules in states. And then differing rules within cities and counties in those states. Plus there is a CBA and Union to consider.
As for the SF rule, wait a week or two. It will change. And therein lies one of the problems….
