I feel a moderator "thread lock" approaching.

U7

You are obviously out of touch as to the manner in which some other states handle the NFHS and filter things all the way down to the individual leagues in some instances regarding rule interpretations. FED rules may form the "vast basis" of the rule book but there are certain things that are left to the governing leagues. Just because you or an esteemed state interpreter from Washington say something should be ruled in a particular manner has absolutely no bearing on folks in my area. AFAIK I'll rule in the manner in which I'm expected to rule in MY area. If that makes me less of an umpire in the NFHS's eyes then so be it.

You're tilting at the wrong windmill in some instances.

U7

And you are who from where?

Hmmm,
 

"FED rules may form the "vast basis" of the rule book but there are certain things that are left to the governing leagues."

Please be very careful with statements such as this.

The Federation Charter states, areas, cities and leagues are not allowed to make arbitrary changes to FED rules.

While it is clear that some areas "say" they have local interpretations those changes ARE NOT condoned or accepted by FED.

FED has no process (other than FED asking states to 'try' new or corrected rulings in test situations) for states to step outside their rules.

If you don't believe me on this issue just contact Kyle McNeely and he can explain more fully.

I would appreciate that you let me contact your local assignor or association President so that we can discuss what local rules your group has established.

Thanks in advance.

Tee

Re: Hmmm,
 

Tee;

On March 26, 2001, Warren Willson said that I was umpyre007 and Warren couldn't be wrong, could he? :D Moving right along, let me answer for my area of the country. I do not know who umpyre007 is or where he lives.

I have been to any number of high school games in the DC area that modify the FED rules. I do not work a lot of FED ball any more but the most recent case that I can recall (March/April 2004) was at Flint Hill High School in Oakton, Virginia. At the plate conference, we were informed that only OBR balks were to be called and that they played with the OBR visits rule. There may have been some other changes but they had nothing to do with safety. I would not have compromised on that. Prior to FED adopting appeals, I am fairly sure that this school played with OBR appeals.

I also recall a game this spring at Paul VI High School in Fairfax, VA that was played against a public high school that had some of the same rules modifications.

My local association has not modified any rules but I do not believe that umpyre007 was talking about that. He specifically mentioned "governing leagues" as the ones who modify rules.

Peter

And you will do...what?

Don't we already have someone here who likes to take credit for involving himself in rule interps?

I'm trying to understand what your involvement would be in the situation. I imagine a call to any of the groups in our state.

"Hi, this is Tim C. and I understand that you may or may not be enforcing the entire Fed rule book. You know that the charter states that you can't arbitrarily decide which rules you will use, unless given explicit permission as a test state."

Click...dial tone.

Peter,
I couldn't have said it any better. But this was fun.
WCB

I had the privilege of spending time and having dinner with both Tee and Tim Stevens this week. Two finer gentlemen and passionate umpires you could not hope to meet.

Personally, I think the OBR ruling is loony. What if the ball becomes stuck and there's a TAG play? Are we going to allow a tag with a ball stuck between the fingers? Now, I wouldn't call the ball dead -- it's not like the fielder COULDN'T get the ball out -- he just couldn't do it in time to make the play. The call should've been SAFE from the get go, but some MLU got creative with a ruling and the powers that be decided to go the easy route and accept the ruling. Too bad.

My opinion doesn't count.

--Rich

It is one thing to have a ruling in the casebook that everyone can see. It is entirely another thing to have a play or a situation that the NF has never put in black and white. States can and do take those plays and make a decision. Or they take a fringe rule or mechanic and decide what is going to be done with their officials. There have even been situations where the NF came out and said things on their website and Official's Quarterly to only contradict with rulebook logic and common sense. I know my state in those cases have made their own rulings or interpretations to give their officials some clarity on questions their officials have come up with.

It might not be a baseball situation, but I know the IHSA has told us to not make an issue with certain religious expressions that directly contradict the rulebook in basketball. They also allowed players in basketball to wear an insulin pump, which seems to directly contradict the NF rulebook. It happens quite often around here and I could not even tell you who those people are that many refer to. Those are not the people we answer to. If they want us to do something, if we want to work the playoffs, we do what they request. When in Rome.......

Peace

Carl:

I'll never understand you. Where was I wrong?

When Tim told me his interpretation for the state of Washington and I relayed that to you?

Or maybe when Elliot issued a ruling and I said all FED umpires should follow his ruling?

Or maybe because I personally disagree with the ruling as do Rich, Tim, Tee and a number of others you chose not to harass. I guess what I did wrong was to question the BRD. God forgive me.

I don't know why you would hate yourself for posting. I said nothing against you. And when I found another error at officiating.com, I sent it to you privately rather than posting it here.

As I said I will never understand you.

Another Fed violation...
 

Jeff, we agree again. People are going to start talking.

Fed has a rule prohibiting "Dew-Rags", bandanas and head scarves in baseball. Last year, we had an umpire eject a Public League kid that was wearing the UnderArmour skullcap under his baseball hat. He was a stud who was getting scouted by a decent college. The ump tossed him in the first inning. The ruling was appealed for clarification and the Jeopardy geniuses at Fed said it should be prohibited. The Public League then asked the IHSA for a ruling and were told that the skull cap (specifically designed to keep the head cool) was allowed, as it was not visible. Logic dictated that we depart from the Fed interp.

Would you toss out a kid that has his Yarmulke under his helmet? The IHSA is light years ahead of some states in making sure that the integrity of the game isn't compromised. Differing from the Fed here is just more proof.

Re: Another Fed violation...
 

There were basketball officials that were not allowing a girl that was Muslim to play with a head dress in our state because the NF said so. Well the IHSA told officials to stop ruling that way, allow the girl to play. She had to file a letter with the IHSA and the reasoning, but they made it clear not to use the FED Rule as it related to this issue. The IHSA posted this on our personal website (you heard me right) to allow this type of religious expression. It is not the FED that is going to have to deal with the lawsuit. They made a similar ruling as it related to Yarmulkes and the pins that go in their head. It is illegal to have anything hard or potentially sharp stuck to your body. Well someone did not allow some kid to play and it was an issue state wide.

I agree the FED is the body that should be followed to some extent, but the Federation is not going to have to suffer the consequences if they sue or if they take issue with those rules. The IHSA and any state have the right to make a ruling outside of what the FED says. I have even seen some rules that changed based on some of the issues that have taken place here. They used to be a rule against wearing pants in a basketball game. Funny the following year after the paper covered a story in the Chicago Tribune about that girl that was Muslim, the NF changed their rule. Funny how that happens. BTW, at the time there was IHSA Director was on the Basketball Committee. I am sure he shared that concern with the NF.

Peace

Hehehehe,
 

Windy I do find you funny.

So you know:

I talk with the Federation National Office about six times a year. I talk directly with Mr Hopkins rarely.

I can call, and will call, any association that I care to call. I write articles on umirping and I am always researching.

See what I figure is that you really have nothing better to do than go after people in a personal way and clearly understand that there is no way but the "WCB Way" -- know what, you've just won.

I'll match resume with you ANY day . . .

Hope you have a great season.

Tee

BTW, I simply stated facts. There is no system under FED to make individual changes to their rules. If you do, then you are simply no longer playing under FED rules.

And Windy, the answer is yes . . . in my area the player would have been ejected for the skull cap. Like it or not that IS what would happen.

T

Re: Hehehehe,
 

That's true for the FED football and basketball rulesets also.

Tee,
When did you graduate Pro School?
What position in class?
Were you hired for a Minor League Roster?
How many years did you work at that level?
For whom?
How many games did you work at the D-1 level this year?
How many Minor League games did you work this year?

Those are personal questions, directed at the person who said he would match resumes with me.

I'm waiting.