Quote:
|
Originally Posted by gsf23
And how would your credibility as a team look if it did come up and your partner wasn't going to allow the runner? Would you then go and have a talk to him? What are you going to tell the coach?
"Well, coach, I knew that he explained the rule wrong before but I didn't want to say anything."
That will really help your credibilty. Or how about the next day when this coach comes out to argue that the other team can't use a CR because the umpires yesterday told us that that was the rule. Now how is your credibilty with that coach or with the other umpiring crew who has to deal with the problem you caused.
If your partner is going to be explaining rules at a plate meeting then you better be sure that he is giving the correct information. If you don't want to do it at the meeting then you need to pull him aside, get things straight before the game starts and make sure both coaches know what the correct rule should be.
Of course the real simple solution to all of this is don't conduct a rules clinic during your pre-game.
|
First of all, I was interested in feedback on whether keeping silent was what I SHOULD have done; the followup was only to explain why I didn't speak up. Thanks for the comments.
As to stepping in as BU on a lineup card discussion between the PU and coach, I don't think so. Obviously, if it came up in the game, the rule as he explained it would have been enforced, unless the coach chose to protest. Since neither expressed any disagreement at the plate meeting, that was highly unlikely.
I agree the entire mini-rules clinic should not have been conducted at the plate meeting. However, note that if it hadn't been discussed, then he still would have enforced the CR rule during the game as he apparently understood it. So a "proper" plate meeting would have had exactly the same result as me keeping silent on the issue.