Tatoos in MLB

[tjchamp]

In the Twins v Seattle game last night, the umps made the Seattle pitcher (Bobby Madritsch) put on sleeves to cover his tats. I didn't see the game, and have no idea what his tats look like, but what is the rule for that sort of thing? MLB, NFHS?

[akalsey]

The Jay's Justin Miller has been told to cover up his arm when he pitches. His arm is covered with tattoos. Picture at http://espnradio.espn.go.com/espnrad...toryId=1772709

[jicecone]

Originally posted by tjchamp
In the Twins v Seattle game last night, the umps made the Seattle pitcher (Bobby Madritsch) put on sleeves to cover his tats. I didn't see the game, and have no idea what his tats look like, but what is the rule for that sort of thing? MLB, NFHS?

MLB/OBR Rule 1.11,discuss the uniform and items that are and are not acceptable on them but, it does NOT specifically say you can't have tattoes. However, it is generally accepted that items on the pitchers uniform, that may distract the batter or add confusion during a pitch, be removed, or in this case covered.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Sounds like just another cry baby batter whining and thereby trying to get into the pitcher's head.

I hate enforcing rules that just don't feel right...

"Those blue, green, black, and red tatoos are distracting me ump. Can you have him cover them up?

Ooohhh yeah right - they look a lot like a baseball don't they?.

I'd like to answer "How about you quit trying to read his tatoos and watch the flippin ball - bone head. Hope you got a bone head because after I tell him to rearrange his uniform and we spend 10 minutes trying to cover his artwork, he's gonna be throwing at your bone head. Good luck."

Not that I like tatoos - I don't see the need for this latest permanent degradation to your body, fashion statement. I think they are rather stupid... okay extremely

Just look at the progression of his pictures. In the first picture (on the right) with minimal tatoos, he actually appears alert and awake, and has a mentally balanced look about himself (he can't shape the brim of his hat for crap).

His last picture, 4 years later, he looks like a social loser. I like the question about substance abuse - looks like too many drugs to me. Appears we woke him up after a night of hard partying to take a few pictures for a tatoo magazine promotion. Yeah, a hero for the world of tatoo-ers. (It may have taken him serveral years but he did learn how to shape a hat brim).

I would be inclined to say to the batter "If those are distracting you from concentrating on the ball ... I don't know what to tell you... I can see the ball just fine. Let's get in the box and play ball."

[TriggerMN]

So they should get rid of the batter's eye in centerfield in all ballparks now, and let fans sit out there with red, blue, and green shirts? Should the pitcher be allowed to wear a long sleeve shirt with stripes? I guess I see no problem in enforcing this rule...

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Originally posted by TriggerMN
So they should get rid of the batter's eye in centerfield in all ballparks now, and let fans sit out there with red, blue, and green shirts? Should the pitcher be allowed to wear a long sleeve shirt with stripes? I guess I see no problem in enforcing this rule...

As long as you are going to be ridiculous, let me be ridiculous too. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your comment.

I wasn't aware of a rule that says fans cannot sit in the outfield with red, blue, or green shirts. Which rule is that? They currently don't restrict white shirts in the outfield. You're not that LL Umpire that created the big stir and called the police because some shirtless, obnoxious fan on his bicycle beyond the outfield fence wouldn't move to some other location as directed by the PU after being requested by some 8-year old batter? (I actually don't remember the situation as discussed here a few months back but it was rather ridiculous.)

Stripes are not acceptable; there is a rule for that.

FED rule says
1-5 "A pitcher shall not wear any item on his hands, wrists or arms which may be distracting to the batter."
OBR rule says
1.11 "(a)(2) Any part of an undershirt exposed to view shall be of a uniform solid color for all players on a team. Any player other than the pitcher may have numbers, letters, insignia attached to the sleeve of the undershirt.
...(e) No part of the uniform shall include a pattern that imitates or suggests the shape of a baseball. "

What if the pitcher has a bad tan - milky white like a new baseball? What if the pitcher has a good tan like a dirty baseball? "That's distracting, Blue; have him cut his arm off." "No problem. I'll get right on that."

What if the pitcher doesn't have a way to cover his tatoos - everyone is wearing short sleeves and there are no other uniform options? If you begin to enforce this rule at a particular batter's whim, now, on a questionable distraction issue for a particular batter, you are going to have to get a new pitcher. Your enforcement now becomes rather more severe to appease a particular batter.

Before I drop off the deep end of distraction...

I just don't see that a red, blue and green tattooed arm could be confused with a baseball or that it should be visually distracting. I would say it is either a lack of focus on the part of the batter or that the batter is trying to distract the pitcher; with the latter being the more obvious reason. Distracting the pitcher is what I would consider an unsporting act. But rather than address that, I would likely try to dissuade the batter from his request (unless I also felt the pitcher was distracting - and in this case, I don't). "He does look kinda stupid with all those tattoos... but it doesn't look like a baseball and it shouldn't confuse you. Let's play some ball."

Additionally, uniform issues like this should be resolved before the pitcher starts - not after several batters have already faced him. Perhaps that is what was done - I don't know. And perhaps it is distracting - I don't think I'll ever be behind the plate for him. So I will probably never know.

I don't really want to argue the issue I just don't envision a tattooed arm as being a distraction to seeing the baseball. Rather, I see the request as the batter's attempt to distract the pitcher. Apparently the umpire working the game didn't feel that way because they had him cover his distracting arm. Go figure.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

You know, after I wrote all of that, I thought well maybe an arm that is tattooed everywhere except one location COULD look like a ball (at the bare spot). So I looked back at the photos... Holy crap! It's not even his pitching arm that is tattooed.

I might be willing to enforce the rule just because he is an idiot. What imbecile would tatoo another man's name on his butt for $1000? Justin Miller, I guess. Apparently he's not making as much money as we might think - perhaps he spent it all on tattoos ... or that substance abuse problem?

[TBBlue]

DownTown,
You have to remember, this is the same league who in one game this year banned some of the Red Sox helmets because the pine tar had covered the B. Umpire ruled the helmet was not uniform, most likely at league request. Of course, probably if you turn the Sox on tonight, you will see the tarred helmets. I'm watching the Angels and Disarrays right now, on ESPN, and the a couple of the Angels' batters have the A with the halo completely covered. It looks nasty, but I'm not the fashion police. It seems to me that enforcing something for a tatoo, or a tarred helmet, or anything silly that really doesn't affect the game, is just opening a pandora's box that is better off left alone. Kind of like the coaches boxes. Especially at the amateur level. I agree with you. The tat doesn't look like a baseball, it doesn't distract me and my job requires focus on the ball, let's play.

On the other hand, ejecting him for being stupid and permanently painting his body is appealing...