Wed Apr 06, 2016, 01:06pm
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
We can debate semantics and what is in and not in the Rules Book, but this is not a "proper appeal". The DHC's question is telling me that he does not know if R1 did or did not touch HP, at least that is how we, as umpires, should be interpreting his question. And believe me, I have had HCs in both softball and baseball come out and ask me the wrong question because they did not have a clue as to what happened more times than I care to admit.
I think that the proper response (and some might think it is a little cheeky) to the DHC's question is: "Coach, are you telling me that you do not know if R1 did or did not touch HP?" Hopefully, the DHC will understand what he has been asked and either get help from one of his ACs or make the proper appeal.
Because I can guarantee everybody reading my post if you answer the DHC's question with a "no" followed by the DHC appealing R1's not touching HP, you will most likely be writing a game report regarding the OHC's ejection because he/she vigorously objected to you telling the DHC that R1 did not touch HP thus enabling the DHC to appeal the play at HP.
MTD, Sr.
|
There is no debate, the definition of appeal requires the manager/coach/player to ask the given question. The umpire is forbidden from ruling on the violation until the question is asked. IMO, this is a perfect example of a proper appeal.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|