(Snip for brevity)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve
So, (in summary), I agree with Mike that the rules are there; I also agree with others who suggest the rules aren't clearly there.
|
I agree that some are not written well for the casual reader. As Steve noted, we are so involved through participation in arenas not normally available to most umpires, we get a bit more information. Where the breakdown comes into play is that many of those responsible for training umpires at the local level do not always convey purpose and effect.
What I really don't want to see is a scenario specific rule book. I fear that once that begins, we will end up with a tome that will actually cause more confusion and less reference by the local umpire. Yes, not every rule is absolute and fair, but they are not difficult to learn and enforce. Many of the problems involving umpires involves laziness. Many umpires barely break the book and attend maybe one clinic and rely on that as a full-scale reference. Well, if you want a clinic that detail, you will need more than a weekend.
Another problem with attempting to become more specific is that certain situations get overlooked and leave a gap in the rules. A perfect example is the D3K with two outs and 1B unoccupied. In an effort to word the rule properly so people understood the exception to the third strike rule w/two outs, the obvious was overlooked and omitted from the book. Even when discovered it took two years to get it corrected.
Personally, I don't think the rules as written are that difficult to comprehend, but you all know how anal I am about the rules. I do believe that umpires get themselves into trouble when they read a rule and look for specifics instead of just applying the rule and leave the "what ifs" out of the thought process.
BTW, as I understand it, the deputy supervisors have been tasked to review the rules.