Awesome!!! So cool.

I would replace “The Coach may cause any Proxy to act at any time, and should…” with “The Coach is a Player for the purpose of all subrules of the rule “The Assistant Referees”.

Wow Bucky, I commend you. It even fits into Kevan’s laws of the game framework beautifully.

That Coach clause is there as a backup so that if a Proxy’s inability to act holds the game up, you can fix it.  But yes, this rule should also explicitly treat you as a player.

What does “The Coach may cause any Proxy to act at any time, and should do so to keep the game running smoothly.” do? I don’t understand what new things it allows me to do that I couldn’t do otherwise or what the limitations of the rule are.

Assuming “If a rule allows a Player to cause a Proxy to act” works for the Coach, it allows you to make Proxies take any action a Player could take, as long as the action doesn’t require making a blog post.

“If a rule allows a Player to cause a Proxy to act, that Player can update the gamestate on behalf of that Proxy as allowed by the rules.” By “as allowed by the rules” what do you mean? Anyway that the Proxy would normally be allowed to act? Can I do this at any time or only when the Proxy would normally be allowed to act? In the first case, how is that fair or reasonable? In the second case, what does this allow me to do that I could not otherwise do?

Long story short, what does “The Coach can update the Gamestate on behalf of that Proxy as allowed by the rules (If a Player needs to make comments or GNDT updates on behalf of a Proxy, they must start the comment with “PROXY (X):” where (X) is the name of the Proxy.  Proxies cannot make blog posts.) and should do so to keep the game running smoothly” even mean? Specifically, what does “I may as allowed by the rules” permit and not permit me to do?

It’d permit you to make proxies choose a shirt number under rule 2.4 or take the ball with a Throw-In, for example.

How about if we replace “The Coach may cause any Proxy to act at any time, and should do so to keep the game running smoothly.” with “The Coach can act as if he is any Proxy.” That makes more sense to me, but does it make more sense to others?

Also, this is a DM type rule :D

I feel like your second version is more DM-like than the original (even though they basically have the same denotation). The original says that you can make sure the proxies don’t accidentally stall the game, while your version means you can do whatever you want with the proxies. I would actually phrase it as “The Coach may cause any Proxy to act at any time if they feel it would keep the game running smoothly” or something similar to that to make it clear that the Coach’s job is to facilitate good play and not to create gameplay (if that made sense).

“If a rule allows a Player to cause a Proxy to act, that Player can update the gamestate on behalf of that Proxy as allowed by the rules.” <—I’m not sure this phrase is needed. It appears to be saying “If the rules let you do stuff, you are allowed to follow those rules but you’re not allowed to do things the rules don’t allow you to do.” I mean, isn’t that basically implied by the fact that they are rules?

Okay, okay. I was confused about the clarity of “may cause any Proxy to act” but it seems that others are quite clear on what it means.