Quote:
Originally posted by SanDiegoSteve
WWTB,
I don't mean to say that I would allow shenanagins or Tom Foolery on the part of the coach when the ball is dead. What I said was, going strictly by the cockamamey Fed rules, that no provision prohibits such actions. I have personally never witnessed such unsportsmanlike acts by a coach, but I would like to have a rule supporting their punishment if the situation ever occurs. 3-2-2 is flawed. The Case Book says a coach can assist a runner whenever the ball is dead. What kind of assistance is where it becomes vague, wouldn't you agree? 5-1-2 does not even mention anything about a dead ball situation, even though you keep quoting it as a reference. That won't change the fact that the Fed did not directly address this omission. From what Carl has said, I gather that they are in the process of clarifying this very situation.
Cordially yours,
Steve
|
Again, you are mixing your rulings. 5-1-2f states the penalty for a coach who assists a runner. It would normally be a delayed dead ball and the runner would be declared out. Since we already have a dead ball, there is no need for that action, but you still have an infraction and penalty to deal with. I'm certain you can discern between picking a runner up who has fallen and preventing a runner from passing another. Simply, one is assisting and the other is preventing.
I will not beat the drum again, but this is very similar to the Verbal Obstruction debate. The book states nothing about the exact play, but we have to use our judgement to keep things fair. A runner tripping over a base gains no advantage by being helped up. In my play, the coach gained a tremendous advantage by his actions. Others have told you this, not just me. Yes, the NFHS rulebook is ambiguous but this is a no brainer. You are a veteran umpire and should know that we penalize those who cheat. This coach cheated and the out is called.
Unabashedly Vocal,
WhatWuzThatBlue