Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Little Jimmy
One of the heads of a local rec league called me tonight with a rules question. It involved the removal of a batting hemet after numerous team warnings. My first reaction was that it probably could have been handled a lot differently, but I wasn't there and she simply wanted to know if the decision on the field was supported by any rule. I'm not sure, but I know what I read.
Rule set is ASA with some variations. As I said, the single umpire had warned team A "numerous" times about removing their helmets before reaching the dugout. 1 out. B1 hits a routine grounder to F6 who throws her out at 1st. As she turned to go to the dugout, she removed her helmet. Umpire says "you've been warned enough" and declared the now retired runner out again for a 3rd out. This 3rd out did not set well with team A's coach, who contacted the league president who called me after the game.
The only thing I can see is ASA 3-5-E which says in part ..."failure to wear the batting helmet shall cause the player to be removed from the game". It also goes on to to say that if the umpire judges this to be a deliberate act the violator shall be "declared out immediately".
In my opinion, I might have removed the player from the game but I don't think a second out on a retired runner is what this rule is speaking of. Any thoughts?
|
Sorry, based on the given scenario I wouldn't even have warned the player.
Read the last sentence of 3.5.E.Effect "Umpires should use discretion as to the intent of the rule concerning player safety." IOW, if there is no play, there is no inherent danger, there is no reason for a "gotcha".
And ejecting the player is a bit extreme, in a case where an out is questionable.