|
Wed Jun 08, 2005, 10:32pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Talk about OOO (boogers)
__________________
"Contact does not mean a foul, a foul means contact." -Me 
|
|
Wed Jun 08, 2005, 10:47pm
|
|||
|
|||
w_sohl,
No, that's not an OOO. That is a grossly incompetent umpire who does not know the rules and changed the proper outcome of the game because of his inexcusable ignorance. The penalty under FED for a runner intentionally removing his helmet while the ball is in play is warn/eject - NOT an out. The linked story said the (acting) head coach properly protested the call at the time. I cannot believe this protest was not upheld. Does Indiana not allow protests even during tourney play? Unbelievable. JM
|
|
Thu Jun 09, 2005, 07:25am
|
|||
|
|||
|
We may not be perfect in Connecticut but, our instructions for the HS playoffs were very clear about getting the rulings on the field correct.
"Each crew will have in their possession a rule book that will be used if necessary, to make a correct ruling on the field" This would have CLEARLY corrected a decision made, by what seems on the surface, an overly arrogant official. (OAO)
|
|
Thu Jun 09, 2005, 07:32am
|
|||
|
|||
|
While there is an incompetent umpire on the field here (especially the PU/crew chief..WOW!), I agree with Coach that the bigger problem here is that the IHSAA didn't reverse the call on the protest. Now, here in PA there are no protests and whatever would have been decided on the field, whether wrong or right, would have been final. However, I guess that protests are allowed in the IHSAA but the call was still upheld. I don't understand that.
__________________
I know God would never give me more than I could handle, I just wish he wouldn't trust me so much.
|
|
Thu Jun 09, 2005, 01:03pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
His name wasn't Rut... Kidding. I find it unreal that the kid would intentionally take his helmet off in any case. Talk about your Lean Lett's!! Sportcenter Not So Top 10 that would be an easy number 1 in my book.
__________________
Jim Need an out, get an out. Need a run, balk it in.
|
|
Thu Jun 09, 2005, 02:35pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think part of the reason the appeal wasn't granted was because I think they had already played the next game in Sectionals or Regionals and you can't really penalize the other team for the officials mistake. The official did get the rest of his playoff assignments pulled from what I understand.
If it had been me in this sitch, game winning shot, all I do is make sure he touches the plate and then I get the hell out of there, even if I had warned them about removing their helmets. Besides, wouldn't the penalty in NFHS just be an ejection from the remainder of that game (and next) but the run still counts?
__________________
"Contact does not mean a foul, a foul means contact." -Me
|
|
Mon Jun 20, 2005, 08:44am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Follow-up Article
|
|
Mon Jun 20, 2005, 09:09am
|
|||
|
|||
|
I am glad to see that this writter is blaming the system and not the umpire. However, on such a simple rule, the umpire should have know this and his partners should have helped him out here wether or not he asked for it.
__________________
"Contact does not mean a foul, a foul means contact." -Me
|
|
Mon Jun 20, 2005, 10:21am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Talk about OOO (boogers)
Quote:
How this can happen in a game with three or four umpires is beyond me. What were the other umpires thinking? Obviously they didn't know the rules either. Our state had a similiar situation two years ago and the only thing that happened was the umpire was suspended for a year for missing a malicious contact interpretation, and then a letter was sent to the losing school from our state apologizing for the mistake. Whew! Thanks David
|
|
Mon Jun 20, 2005, 08:52pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Follow-up Article
Quote:
This rule wasn't just changed yesterday. Evidently, the "Good Ole Boy" system pervails there, and its not based on what you know, but who. The PU said he didn't know his partners. Well he didn't know the rules either. And if he was any good at all, he would have got the crew together to straighten out the call. No I'm sorry, I'm wrong, he would'nt have made the stupid call to begin with. No sympathy here. Be prepared, know the rules and GET IT RIGHT.
|
|
Mon Jun 20, 2005, 09:16pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
As an umpire in Indiana... a few points of clarification.
State tournament officials are selected in all sports by coaches votes and how far you have advanced previously in the playoffs as the main criteria. The umpire in question did lose his next two assignments, which would have included the state semifinals. He might also be relegated back to the beginning of the cycle as far as eligibility goes starting next season. The state association does not allow protests of any kind and it was rejected on that point alone. Other states I have worked in also do not allow protests. Hope this helps!
|
|
Mon Jun 20, 2005, 09:31pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
But it doesn't absolve these officials from not knowing rules that were changed several years ago, especially in a very important game.
|
|
Tue Jun 21, 2005, 09:31am
|
|||
|
|||
|
that's punishment???
Quote:
And all he loses is two assisgnments - that means he could have called the state finals - ARGHH! The lack of backbone from our states never ceases to amaze me - and our state is in the same boat as I mentioned above. You cost a team a shot at a championship and all we do is say "we sorry" and slap the officials hand. And why were the other two officials not suspended also - there is no way I would have left the field with such a ruling. Stay and get it right! And also as we all know, just goes to show how much coaches know at umpiring and rating umpires. Thanks David
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Re: Talk about OOO (boogers)
Linear Mode
