[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

We are to review the equipment before the game and ask the coach the same things (in all NF sports BTW). So no it is not a complete unequal thing when the NF tends to review rules changes with other committees.

Yes, Jeff, it is. They are unequal - 'complete' was not a word I used.

You are not required to check EVERY football helmet on every player, are you? In baseball, EVERY helmet must be checked by the umpire pre-game. Every bat was to be checked as well.

For example the concussion language is the same language used in other sports. The old baseball rule was just silly to have when in other sports where the equipment is much more dangerous to the players we only ask the coach "Are your players properly and legally equip?"

Concussions? Huh? I don't mention them at my plate conferences. If you do, it is unnecessary. It is not relevant to our discussion though.

As for the "Are your players properly and legally equipped?", we were REQUIRED to ask that for many years and still are.

And if we discovered an illegal item we removed it in accordance to those specific sport's rules. A helmet in baseball rarely comes into play in a baseball game compared to football where every play might have some head contact.

Sigh. It is pointless to argue with you. There is a reason why helmets are employed in baseball. Clearly you believe otherwise.

I disagree when you said it was really on us. All we did was check before the game. During the game coaches had more knowledge what their players used or did not use more than us.

No, Jeff, you are wrong.

We were REQUIRED to see that players were compliant with safety standards. The rule book mandated it and our interpretation meetings stressed the need to do this check. The responsibility was entirely ours.

Once a game starts, most coaches are not aware of what players use for equipment. I see every batter when he steps into the box. I can see his helmet, bat and if he is wearing anything illegal. Can't you?

And considering I have never had a single opposing coach ask to check the legality of the bat or helmet, this was a silly practices. We would just check before the game and unless something changed we would not know necessarily that they were using illegal equipment like a cracked helmet unless we spot checked it and saw the crack ourselves.

I suggest you read up on why we checked bats. Coaches didn't know, care or bother. There are numerous articles online about illegal bats being used this year and what happened.

I have had a couple coaches ask me to check bats that were involved in games. One was the -10 I mentioned in an earlier post. Maybe you have heard of Phil Garner, Chris Sabo, Albert Belle, Wilton Guerrero, George Brett, Sammy Sosa or Robin Ventura using illegal bats. I know I have.

And the reason I mentioned football is the fact that is the same exact procedure that is used in that sport in the pre-game meeting that is also required with the coaches before the game. The difference is that we do not bring the coaches together to ask in the same meeting, but we still ask.

No. You simply showed why the new rule will be useless. In football, all you do is ask for a coach to confirm that his players are compliant. You did not physically inspect their equipment, as we were required to do by the rules in baseball. Jeff, you are comparing unequal things.

This new baseball rule is more in line with other sports as if you work other sports you will realize they like to use something in one sport that works and require it in other sports.

edited for brevity

I could care less about basketball, name dropping or the other non-sequitors you employ. The fact remains that the new rule is useless in its present form. Why ask a coach to confirm player equipment if there is no penalty involved for him/her? Why not simply call the game without the inquiry since they won't have consequences? That is the way we officiate in collegiate and OBR ruled ball. Asking a question of a coach that is unnecessary is pointless.