OBR's 2006 Rule Changes (23 of 'em!)

[mcrowder]

Make sure you are only implementing these new rules if your league (USSSA is the only organization I'm aware of that actually states this) states that they are using OBR according to the Sporting News. As you said, MLB's OBR has NOT yet adopted these changes officially (yet!).

[UMP25]

Well, MLB's online rules are several years old. The Sporting News is simply the entity that puts the rules into print for en masse consumption. We have a summer college league and another high school varsity level summer league that both play under what they always call "Pro Rules," yet they understand that this is "Official Baseball Rules." In the umpiring profession, of course, we refer to it as "OBR," which makes it easier linguistically, I guess.

Regardless, it was explained to me that MiLB is bound by these rules and their 23 changes, and that they will apply to MLB "officially" when the Players Assn. approves them. How and when that happens I don't presently know.

[mrumpire11]

MiLB has adopted all 23 of the rules changes. The MLB Players Union has voted to adopted 4 of the changes (eliminating redundant wording and such) the rest are in the process of being ratified. The players union has a one year veto before they have to vote on them. The rule changes are also in effect for all leagues to play by the Official Baseball Rules.

[SanDiegoSteve]

This is going to totally confuse everyone, in other words, right?

MiLB has adopted them all. Great. But most of us do not work pro ball.

I think the big reason why we aren't discussing the new rules is because they haven't been advertised very much, and few people are even aware of them. Probably just us umpires who read online forums.

UMP25, they are in the Sporting News Rules, but they are not contained in the 2006 Official Rules Of Baseball (Triumph) book, which for some reason came with my rules packet this year, when normally I receive the Sporting News version.

So basically, my 2006 OBR rule book is worthless, if we are supposed to use the new rules?

[UmpJM]

Gentlemen,

Two of the leagues I am coaching in this year use the following as the "foundation rules:

"Official Baseball rules published by the National Baseball Congress..."

Does anyone know if the "23 changes" are included in the NBC version?

Thanks.

JM

[mcrowder]

NBC's most recent version has NONE of the 23 changes. Yet.

[UMP25]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

This is going to totally confuse everyone, in other words, right?

So what else is new?

MiLB has adopted them all. Great. But most of us do not work pro ball.

I think the big reason why we aren't discussing the new rules is because they haven't been advertised very much, and few people are even aware of them. Probably just us umpires who read online forums.

You mean us geeks.

UMP25, they are in the Sporting News Rules, but they are not contained in the 2006 Official Rules Of Baseball (Triumph) book, which for some reason came with my rules packet this year, when normally I receive the Sporting News version.

So basically, my 2006 OBR rule book is worthless, if we are supposed to use the new rules?

From what I was told by two individuals in pro ball, one an ump and the other who works in the MLB office, The Sporting News edition is the "official" one and is usually the latest one to be published, mainly because TSN waits until MLB gives them the go-ahead, which is based on whether or not there are any rule changes.

I do know that for the last umpteen years, when our association places its order for TSN OBR books, we have received them in early to mid-March or so. This year, the association rate order form we use didn't even get sent to us until just recently, meaning the books themselves weren't generally available until much later than usual.

[bossman72]

Are these rule changes published in a news article or something similar, so i could print it out and show it to our rules interpreter? I'd print this page out, but a free forum open to anybody isn't really a good reliable source of information (err- not convincing enough).

[UMP25]

I haven't seen them published anywhere except in the OBR by TSN.