Time to Eat My Cap?

[thumpferee]

Originally posted by Tim C
While it is a LL "type" rule actually there are two references in FED. 1) for intentionally throwing a bat or helmet and 2) carelessly throwing a bat.

While no "real" umpire would call anything concerned with this in a FED game an UMPIRE COULD stretch things to do it if he wanted.

And a "real" umpire would know the FED rule and allow someone to run for a player who was on base and then restricted to the bench or disregard the directive which Bob quoted.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by thumpferee

And a "real" umpire would know the FED rule and allow someone to run for a player who was on base and then restricted to the bench or disregard the directive which Bob quoted.

Tee said that his state has waived this rule, or something to the extent that it is not used.

You don't need to rip Tee because he disagreed with you in another thread. Not everyone volunteers at the local LL 4 nights a week.

Secondly, it is not Tee's fault that you are in a bad mood. You noticed that some people on this board don't look kindly upon LL. What did you expect them to say to you when you profess your love for LL, and ask why others don't have the same feelings as you?

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by blueump
Last night's FED game. Coach had 11 players. They were smearing the other team 27-1. Both players on the bench were original starters. In the top of the second inning I warned the coach about one of his players throwing the bat. The same player came up in the 3rd and threw his bat again, catching the other team's catcher across the knees. I waited till the play was over (he ended up on first) and then calmly walked down to the coach and explained that the player was restricted to the dugout for the remainder of the game.

Now the question was, who was going to take the runner's place at first? Both people on the bench were locked into other batting positions. I vaguely remember an "exceptional substitution" rule which allows another player already in the lineup to return in a different spot if an injury or disqualification takes place, and no other players are available...but I can't find it now in the rule book. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places, or maybe I'm all wet.

I told my partner that if that rule's not in there, I'll eat my hat. Do I have some high fiber coming????

Blueump: NFHS rules allow for a restriction of a player only in the instance of "inadvertent" entry of an illegal player. (3-1-1 Penalty)

The thinking was that since an ejection in many states carries an additional suspension penalty, the rules should allow for a substitution mistake (always the coach's fault) to be penalized to a lesser degree.

BTW: Your job was made easier because the same player carelessly threw the bat. The penalty would have kicked in regardless of who on that team threw the bat.

[thumpferee]

Originally posted by LDUB

Tee said that his state has waived this rule, or something to the extent that it is not used.

You don't need to rip Tee because he disagreed with you in another thread. Not everyone volunteers at the local LL 4 nights a week.

Secondly, it is not Tee's fault that you are in a bad mood. You noticed that some people on this board don't look kindly upon LL. What did you expect them to say to you when you profess your love for LL, and ask why others don't have the same feelings as you?

First off, "I will continue to post anything I want at any time. There is no rule that any poster has to be respectful of any type baseball." < Tee's words.

Secondly, what makes a paid umpire better than a volunteer one?

"real" umpire? gimme a break!

Lastly, when did I "confess my love for LL"?

[ChapJim]

Originally posted by Tim C
While no "real" umpire would call anything concerned with this in a FED game an UMPIRE COULD stretch things to do it if he wanted.

How many times do you (presumably a "real" umpire) let a batter carelessly sling a bat into a catcher (or plate umpire, or both) before you do something about it? Why would a "real" FED umpire ignore a rule so obviously related to safety.

[Tim C]

I have never, nor can I picture a time in the future, that I would concern myself with this ruling.

I guess my "judgment" would be the key issue.

I have never "judged" that a bat was thrown "carelessly".

Have great games!

[ChapJim]

Originally posted by Tim C

I have never "judged" that a bat was thrown "carelessly".

Situation: A batter hits the ball. As he is leaving the batters box, he throws his bat which strikes the catcher in the shoulder or arm or neck or whatever. You do not judge that the batter did this intentionally. Instead, you judge that the batter did this __________. (Fill in the blank with the adverb of your choice.)

[Kaliix]

If the catcher or I get hit with a bat, notice I said hit not rolled on the ground or bounced weakly and made contact, a warning would be issued. If I get hit with a bat twice, well,....

The batter is responsible for controlling his bat after a swing.

Originally posted by Tim C
I have never, nor can I picture a time in the future, that I would concern myself with this ruling.

I guess my "judgment" would be the key issue.

I have never "judged" that a bat was thrown "carelessly".

Have great games!

[Tim C]

"Instead, you judge that the batter did this __________."

Accidentially.

"If the catcher or I get hit with a bat, notice I said hit not rolled on the ground or bounced weakly and made contact, a warning would be issued. If I get hit with a bat twice, well,....

The batter is responsible for controlling his bat after a swing."

And I think I must have a different view of the game than you. Not right or wrong . . . just different.

When working big boy ball I have never considered even warning for this issue.

[cbfoulds]

Not speaking for Tim, of course, but I suspect that he reads "carelessly" to mean something more and different from "accidentally" and "inadvertently", or even "forgetfully" and "stupidly". With this I agree.

Also, like him, I have never, in my judgment, seen a bat thrown "carelessly" on a 90' field: LL a different matter.

Where we, perhaps, disagree, is that I can IMAGINE a situation in which I would be required to consider imposing consequenses for a carelessly thrown bat; if I saw it, I believe I'd call it. It just hasn't happened yet [14 years]; and I doubt that it ever will happen; but you never know, sh!t happens.

[Kaliix]

Originally posted by Tim C

When working big boy ball I have never considered even warning for this issue.

Just out of curiosity, have you ever taken a good shot by a thrown bat in big boy ball?

[Tim C]

Of course.

[Kaliix]

And you didn't warn anybody... Hummmmm...

Okay, I guess we just disagree...

Originally posted by Tim C
Of course.

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by cbfoulds
Not speaking for Tim, of course, but I suspect that he reads "carelessly" to mean something more and different from "accidentally" and "inadvertently", or even "forgetfully" and "stupidly". With this I agree.

Also, like him, I have never, in my judgment, seen a bat thrown "carelessly" on a 90' field: LL a different matter.

I had determined to stay out of this thread, but the apparent inconsistency of Tee's newfound devotion to the letter of the FED law but disdain for this rule and your assertion that you've never seen a "carelessly" thrown bat on a 90-foot field have moved me to reply.

First, some history: The NFHS adopted this rule in 1987. Here's the rationale and the two casebook plays offered us that year:

Rule 3-3-1a: A Team Warning Shall Be Issued for a Carelessly Thrown Bat. The rule is designed to prevent injury caused by a player, coach, substitute or attendant manager, statistician, batboy, batgirl or trainer who carelessly throws a bat. The rule applies to the team at bat or the defensive team, depending upon who commits the infraction. If the umpire judges a player to have carelessly thrown a bat, the umpire shall issue a team warning to the head coach of that player's team which shall result in the next offender on that team being ejected.

Play 1: With Team B at bat (a) B1 receives ball four and on his way to first base, B1 carelessly flips the bat toward his bench almost hitting the on-deck batter, or (b) after hitting a ground ball to F5, B1 flips the bat behind him as he begins his advance to first base and the bat strikes F2, or (c) Fl, while backing up home plate picks up a bat and tosses it out of the way, but in doing so almost hits the plate umpire. Ruling: In (a), (b) and (c) the umpire must [my emphasis] issue a team warning to the head coach of the player committing the infraction.

Play 2: During the third inning, B1 carelessly throws a bat, which results in the umpire issuing a team warning. In the seventh inning the pitcher from the team having received the team warning carelessly throws a bat that nearly hits the bat boy. Ruling: The umpire shall [my emphasis] eject the pitcher since his team had been warned previously.

Play 1, now styled 3.3.1 SITUATION Q, still exists in the casebook. Play 2 disappeared in 1990. Those plays amply illustrate the FED definition of "carelessly thrown." CB: It is disingenuous to claim you're never seen a batter throw a bat that hit the catcher - or you.

In a tape called "Do's, Don'ts, and You'd Betters" (Referee Enterprises, 1989) I said that anyone who fails to enforce every safety rule had better have deep pockets.

I was on a high school field in 1991 when the batter carelessly threw his bat and hit the on-deck batter, sending him to the hospital with teeth missing and lacerated lips. After the assistant coach left with the injured player, I issued a team warning. "You're kidding, right?" was the coach's reaction. My reply: "After that incident, I couldn't be more serious."

I find it both amusing and harrowing that an umpire will to his dying breath enforce the "both-hands-moving-in-the-windup-means-the-start-of-a-pitch" rule and yet ignore the far more serious infraction of careless bat throwing.

I have five or six team warnings a season. Last year, I ejected one player, whose teammate had been the first to carelessly throw the bat. The coach declared that was hard cheese - or words to that effect.

Tee: After your epiphany on the road to Indianapolis, how can you not embrace this rule?

CB: The American Heritage Dictionary lists "inadvertent" as a synonym of "careless."

[cbfoulds]

Originally posted by Carl Childress

CB: The American Heritage Dictionary lists "inadvertent" as a synonym of "careless."

Don't disbelieve you Carl; however the law in most states sees a difference between "careless" and "inadvertent" in determining an individual's culpability for his/her acts. I do, too.

Did you forget to read ALL of the last paragraph of my post? I was not kidding, nor being cute with language: I have never seen a "carelessly" thrown bat on the 90' field. If I saw it, I believe I would call it [as I posted]. I have made the call on a small-ball field.

I have seen INTENTIONALLY thrown bats [& other items]; and have imposed the prescribed sanction. I have seen ACCIDENTALLY released bats, for which the rules prescribe no penalty or warning. I have even seen what I would characterise as INADVERTENTLY thrown bats, which neither caused nor threatened harm to anyone.

Just lucky, I guess.

[Edited by cbfoulds on Apr 24th, 2005 at 06:34 PM]