|
Moose's argument that an umpire should "accept" any protest, without attempting to quash it because it is over a judgment call, is supported by at least two authoritative opinions I am aware of.
This issue has been the subject of lively debate in various discussion forums for years. Last year, it came up on the eteamz.com discussion board right around this time. The focus at that time was on Little League's protest rule, and whether an umpire could or should "reject" a protest because it was over a judgment decision rather than a disputed rule interpretation. It so happened one of the participants in that discussion was going to be attending a Little League rules clinic that very weekend, that was to be attended by Andy Konyar, UIC for Little League Baseball. He took that question (and a number of others) to the meeting and came back with the gospel according to Andy K. On this issue, Andy supported my argument (which is the same as Moose's) that an umpire should acknowledge and announce a coach's protest when it is made, and not attempt to "deny" or "disallow" or "reject" the protest. Ruling on the validity of the protest is the protest committee's job, not the umpire's.
The other authoritative opinion is the Professional Interpretation as reported by Jim Evans in Baseball Rules Annotated. He says:
> Professional Interpretation: At times, a manager may insist on lodging
> a protest on a decision which is, in essence, a judgment call. After
> explaining the prohibition against protesting judgment calls, the
> umpire should go ahead and accept the protest in order to proceed with
> the game in a timely manner. It will then be the league presidentÂ’s
> responsibility to nullify the improperly lodged protest.
There can be no doubt that this remains the current professional interpretation, as just about every protest in MLB you read about is, in fact, over a disputed judgment call. The homerun that should have been fan interference in the ALCS game a couple of years ago was protested - protest denied, judgment decision. Last year, the Rangers protested a balk call. Bzzzzt.
One other reason the umpire should not attempt to deny a protest on the field is because umpires' rulings frequently (hell, almost always) involve both judgment and rule application. Sometimes, it's not completely clear whether the argument is over the umpire's judgment, or his interpretation of the applicable rule. Rather than hash that out on the field, it's better and fairer to let a protest committee sort through the facts and resolve the matter. Infield fly rule is a good example of a rule that has equal parts judgment and rule application, and depending on how the umpire describes his decision making process, what appeared to be a judgment call could have indeed been a misapplication of the rule.
This situation (coach demanding to protest a judgment call) is best summed up with the old joke about the guy who took his wife camping and deer hunting, and then the next morning, hearing a gunshot followed by loud arguing, he ran to the scene and saw his wife holding her gun on a terrified park ranger with his hands up, saying "OK, lady, OK. He's your deer. But at least let me get my saddle off of him."
In this situation, let the coach have his deer. Then use his protest fee to treat the protest committee to beer and pizza.
|