[Blue37]

Originally posted by DG

As I mentioned, I do have experience in how leagues are run, without interference from state chief umpires. Why don't you ask your State Umpire in Chief if he would forbid a local league from "adding" a local league rule that they felt added more safety to the players? [/B]

That is an easy one, but let me correct a misread on your part. If you go back to the beginning and read my posts again, you will notice I have never said the State Umpire-In-Chief prohibits this. It is the rulebook as published by the National Dixie Office which prohits creating, modifying, or disregarding rules, unless specifically allowed. The importance of the State Umpire-In-Chief being in the area is that he shows up unannounced to observe the umpires. If we are not working as proscribed by the governing body, we do not umpire any more. And if complaints are lodged because we do not allow rules modifications, he backs us 100%.

Now to your easy question. It is a matter of legality. The National Association (whether Dixie, LL, or whoever) sets rules for its participants. It has to take safety into consideration when promulgating the rules. When rules are issued, the Association is implicitly saying "These rules are sufficient to provide a reasonable expectation of safety." If it allows the rules to be altered by a local league for "safety" reasons, it is an admission that the original rules are not sufficient. A dangerous precedent to set in this day of litigation.

And let me make one more observation about bat slinging, which was the question that started this thread. The Dixie rule is more safety conscious than simply declaring the batter out. In Dixie, he should be ejected after a warning. If he is simply called out after the warning, he will likely come to bat again that game and can injure someone by slinging the bat again. It will be hard for him to injure someone with a slung bat while sitting on the bench.