Last night, Cal Ripken area championship. OBR, more or less. Pitcher's dad is standing outside the fence but is doing at least as much coaching as the ones in uniform, if not more so. I notice early on that the guy is giving signs to the catcher, who is then relaying them to the pitcher.

My partner and I talked about this, but we couldn't figure out what, if anything, we could do by rule to prevent this. We know the pitcher can't take signs from anyone but the catcher, but can the catcher take signs from anyone he wants, whether it be a coach or a spectator?

The opposing coach tried to point it out to us, but we had already noticed it. I guess it's one of those things that you just don't see that often, especially with 10-year-olds.

I believe, in fact I know, the rule reads that the "pitcher SHALL take signs from the catcher while standing on the rubber." It does NOT say MUST.

Both the catcher and pitcher and take signs from heaven if they truly believe thats where there coming from.

Signs are given from all over the place now days, but it is usually easier on the catcher if he calls the sign and therefore knows what type of pitch to expect.

Now the pitcher hitting the spot. Well thats a whole different topic.

MLB 8.01
Legal pitching delivery. There are two legal pitching positions, the Windup Position and the Set Position, and either position may be used at any time. Pitchers shall take signs from the catcher while standing on the rubber....(my emphisis)

*** Note ***
If we are talking about an ejected coach giving signs to the catcher from that stands, that's an entirely different story. That is not allowed.

You can take signs from anywhere.

You said the signs were being relayed through the catcher, so if the pitcher is on the rubber when the catcher relays them to him, so what? It meets the rule then doesn't it?

Carefull there, the coach has to leave the game and take no further part in that game. It says nothing about been able to communicate via signs. I would probably interpret that as trying to take part in the games however I am just pointing out the fact. BRD. pg 106, Section 161.

Plus, if the pitcher takes signs from the dugout or the stands...what are you going to do, warn him and if you see him looking into the dugout and instruct him to "DON'T LOOK OVER THERE!" Is there any advantage gained? I don't think so.

No... that is just absurd
 

You are kidding right?

Read it again...He has to leave the game and TAKE NO FURTHER PART IN THAT GAME...what part of giving signs to an active player is not participating? What do you suppose those signs are? (Meet us at Dairy Queen after the game.)

If a coach has been removed from participating in the game - either as an on field coach or because their is a limit to how many coaches a team can have, it is your responsibility to limit his input. Travelling leagues at the youth level often have such requirements. Are you going to allow an obvious (the catcher turning to look for the sign is fairly obvious) infraction? Now I know you cannot read minds, but what possible purpose could an individual have for "communicating via signs" to onfield players? This is not a court of law, all we need is a reasonable doubt and we stop the action.

Re: No... that is just absurd
 

Slow your wind down here Mr. Blue. Read what I said and realize you may be preaching to the choir. You got a problem with my reference, see the author. I have heard from a good source that he hangs around here once in a while.

Noobie advice
 

Carefull there, the coach has to leave the game and take no further part in that game. It says nothing about been able to communicate via signs. I would probably interpret that as trying to take part in the games however I am just pointing out the fact. BRD. pg 106, Section 161.

I understand how you would construe it and I have no problem with our common interp. But, a lot of noobies come here and believe what they read.
DO NOT ALLOW A COACH THAT HAS BEEN EJECTED TO COMMUNICATE IN ANY WAY WITH HIS TEAM - UNLESS A PLAYER HAS BEEN INJURED AND HE IS ASKED TO COME BACK OUT.
He has been banished for reason. Allowing him to communicate via signs is no different then allowing him to speak the instruction. Base and bench coaches use signs to communicate and we know that is communication. How could anyone think that a banished coach flashing signs to a player could be anything different?

I read your posts and they are usually pretty good. This one alluded to something that can set a less experienced official down a dangerous path, though.

Re: Noobie advice
 

I hear you and agree.

For the record I must correct myself. BRD pg 106 Section 161 only states "Interesting enough the book does not prohibit communication". I added via signs.