It's Friday

[His High Holiness]

All;

I guess you thought that I was about to start stirring s$$$. You are wrong. I am going to ask a mundane question and come back on Monday to read the results.

With the flap over FED rules in another thread, I thought of a FED rule/procedure that is universally ignored in my area. Each year for the past two or three years, the FED interpreter emphasizes the FED rule that recommends/requires dugout extensions to be made towards the outfield. Yet, without exception, when I go to a FED game, extensions have already been marked off towards home plate. No matter how big the dugouts are, the coach always wants another 10-15 feet of dugout extension which he marks off with a chalk line. It is already in place by the time I get to the plate conference.

Does anyone else have this poblem? If so, do you ignore it like we do in Virgina? This is a possible safety issue because it places coaches and players about 10 feet closer to the batter. Once I considered being an a$$hole and requiring them to move the dugout extensions to their preferred location but I did not pursue it.

Garth, what does Tim Stevens say?

Peter

[gordon30307]

There's a saying "Don't look for trouble trouble will find you soon enough. In Illinois this seems to be "overlooked" as well. If safety is an issue sometime the home team will designate an area to store helmets etc. but only the on deck batter is allowed in the area. Also how about the coach being in uniform of his team? Usually the Head coach is but sometimes his assistant isn't. Or how about the rule that everyone is supposed to be in the dugout? In Illinois it seems that we allow the coach to sit or stand outside the dugout (if the dugout is a reasonable distant from fair territory) however we do keep the players in the dugout. Coaches are expendable! LOL.

[scyguy]

in south central Missouri the Fed balk rule for turning the shoulder when in contact with the rubber before the pitcher comes set is often overlooked.

By the way, what did the Pittsburgh pitcher do last night (9/9/04) to have a balk called? I only heard it on ESPN, but was in BR getting ready for work.

[David B]

Originally posted by His High Holiness
All;

I guess you thought that I was about to start stirring s$$$. You are wrong. I am going to ask a mundane question and come back on Monday to read the results.

With the flap over FED rules in another thread, I thought of a FED rule/procedure that is universally ignored in my area. Each year for the past two or three years, the FED interpreter emphasizes the FED rule that recommends/requires dugout extensions to be made towards the outfield. Yet, without exception, when I go to a FED game, extensions have already been marked off towards home plate. No matter how big the dugouts are, the coach always wants another 10-15 feet of dugout extension which he marks off with a chalk line. It is already in place by the time I get to the plate conference.

Does anyone else have this poblem? If so, do you ignore it like we do in Virgina? This is a possible safety issue because it places coaches and players about 10 feet closer to the batter. Once I considered being an a$$hole and requiring them to move the dugout extensions to their preferred location but I did not pursue it.

Garth, what does Tim Stevens say?

Peter

This is one of the changes that our state actually discussed in our mandatory meeting with the coaches.

And our association makes them do it by the book.

A lot of the coaches complained at first, but they got over it once the season started.

I did notice that other teams coming in though did not know about the changes as far as coaches etc.,

So I'm sure in our state, each association is pretty much free to do it how they want.

Thanks
David

[Peruvian]

And our association makes them do it by the book.

Our association, and pretty much the rest of the state, does the same thing. When we get complaints from coaches regarding "mundane" rules which we enforce, i.e., extension of the dugout, inside line of the batter's box drawn, coaches' box drawn, etc, we refer them to the state. Then the state instructs them to follow the rules or risk forfeit on the next occurance.

And especially if it is a safety issue like dugout extension, the state expects immediate compliance or fines and/or suspensions will occur.

There was so much flack with one school last year over the damn catcher's box that WE would be given a two-week suspension if it was discovered that we played a game without the field being properly marked.

And another thing, it's a huge liability with the dugout extensions going toward the plate. To allow them to do that is downright irresponsible anyway. High school rules are written for high school players (minors), not adults who take liability for their own actions. Coaches who comprimise safety don't give a damn about you OR their player's safety, and wouldn't put up with it.

[N.S.Blue]

Hi all , didn't mean to interrupted , wasn't sure where to start so I just picked here ....Being from Canada I've never heard of that rule , though I have showed up at a couple of Provincials where there was no dugouts at all.

[Peruvian]

Originally posted by N.S.Blue
Hi all , didn't mean to interrupted , wasn't sure where to start so I just picked here ....Being from Canada I've never heard of that rule , though I have showed up at a couple of Provincials where there was no dugouts at all.

NFHS 1-2-4

[N.S.Blue]

While that is a good way of handling the comment , I have another suggestion that works just as well, my Juniors have had great success with it when dealing with border line comments....After the catcher questioning the zone wait for an almost perfect pitch , call time , bend over like your going to clean the plate (make the motions like your are but don't actually touch the plate with the broom , the catcher will pick up on that subtle move) , look right at the catcher and say "Nice pitch eh ?" , "now you do your job I'll do mine" and resume play , you won't have to do this very often for the catcher to get the message , course it could be a little different up here too I'm not sure, we don't tolerate much questioning of the strike zone , in the US you let some of that go ?

[NSump]

Originally posted by N.S.Blue
we don't tolerate much questioning of the strike zone , in the US you let some of that go ?

Horsehockey.

Most of the umpires here are pansies. I spend more time cleaning up messes because umpires are too afraid to deal with guys drawing lines, cursing over strikes and making general a$$es of themsleves. They like to "avoid confrontation."

Now, who be you?

Blaine

[N.S.Blue]

Horsehockey.

Most of the umpires here are pansies. I spend more time cleaning up messes because umpires are too afraid to deal with guys drawing lines, cursing over strikes and making general a$$es of themsleves. They like to "avoid confrontation."

Now, who be you?

Blaine

....That maybe be so in SOME parts of the Province , I don't let them get away with it here locally , neither does P , think about who had the most ejections year before last when you were Prez ....good hint ....you told me that on the phone when we were discussing another issue (if I have your last name correct that is) ….who be me now ??

Still not sure ? Well that was me involved with that Dr. this year who came in the building during the Districts in CB , besides that I'm sure you've seen my name on a few reports over the last 15 years.

Not being smart@ss B , just don't post name online , surprised anyone does now a days !

[N.S.Blue]

I spend more time cleaning up messes because umpires are too afraid to deal with guys drawing lines, cursing over strikes and making general a$$es of themsleves.


Wide spread problem B ? you should know , that WOULD explain my high ejection rate here the first few years cuz they are getting away with it out of town , out of 66 games this year though I only had 2 ejections , one home team , one away , P had 3 I think , so either it's getting better out of town or they've learn not to do it here.