Do you toss this coach?
 

Situation TODAY.
Bear with me, as it is the SECOND ejection that I'm asking about.

Young, bitter ex-pro turned youth travel coach (you know the type) will NOT SHUT UP- all game with the jabs and slurs and just out-of-ear-shot insults.
Opposing team (batting at the time) makes great play to break up a double play. It was hard, but totally clean.

Coach gets into it with third base coach- this gets quelled quickly- next batter, first pitch- plunk.
Rather than run anyone (no one was hurt, just pissed off), we gave both teams bench warnings, and stern words.

Start of the next inning- foul, foul, foul- ask coach for more balls, he snipes back "you need to tell me BEFORE the inning starts"- I explain that we had baseballs when the inning started, get more now.
He flips a few infield balls towards the plate and says "I'm not here to serve you", then turns to his assistant and refers to me in terms I will not repeat.

So after he gets ejected, the game goes along without incident.
But.... (There's always a but, isn't there?)
His team comes back to make a game of it, and in the bottom of the last, are threatening down by three, no outs runnner on first (catcher).

Partner and I both notice the pitcher from the first game leaving the bench and going into the crowd...then returning to talk to the assistant...then leaving again, etc. (we all know what's going on at this point)

Assistant asks for time, and brings in pinch runner. As we make the swap, I warn him that his players better stay out of the stands- he's the coach now.
Team loads bases, then sacs a guy in.

Chaos ensues on team's bench, ten or twelve guys yell for time, players are pouring into the crowd, and the ejected coach has now moved to the edge of the fencing and is shouting orders to everyone- who to sub in, what to do, etc.

Assistant actually walks over to the fence, discusses lineup card with ejected coach, affirms decisions, and continues strategizing. We both notice this and head toward the bench- assistant comes out to make the changes, and we tell him that he can now join his head coach in the stands.

Does anyone have a problem with shipping the second coach?
Rule 4.07
When a manager, player, coach or trainer is ejected from a game, he shall leave the field immediately and take no further part in that game. He shall remain in the club house or change to street clothes and either leave the park or take a seat in the grandstand well removed from the vicinity of his team's bench or bullpen.

I realize that it LOOKED bad, but they tried to get away with one and got caught.


Bainer.

You may have wanted to nip the earlier chirping in the bud as soon as the ex-jock coach started in. That would have prevented the not shutting up the whole game thing.

After you dumped the coach, he should not be allowed in the stands, unless he has changed into street clothes, as the rule specifies. Even in street clothes, he cannot be in the vicinity, close enough for his players and the assistant coach (new manager) to relay signals and instructions. There is no "tunnel" for him to hide out in like in the pros, so when he obviously violates the "take no further part in that game" part of the rule, you warn the new manager not to allow any further communication with the ejected coach. Then, if anyone violates this order, they get ejected. Get rid of the adult coaches, or down to 8 players, and voila, game over.

Don't lose any sleep over running these clowns!

BTW, I have a tournament game next weekend featuring "Blackjack" Jack McDowell and Kurt McKaskill as opposing coaches of 12U all-stars!

WHOA!
Okay, this was a youth travel game, so I'm not going to go nuts and run them down to 8 or dump the grownups- that's the 'A Bomb', baby- you may win the war, but NOTHING survives- not your integrity, not your respect, not the enjoyment being on a ballfield- NOTHING.

I wasn't trying to end the game, or show him up, who would want that? I'm just trying to let the game progress as it should- without the people that are interferring por breaking the rules

-Also, stopped losing sleep over ejections in, like, '84. My question was whether anyone had any opinions or ideas about running a coach who talked to an ejected manager.

The one and only game I have ever forfeited was because the ejected manager would not leave. He left the field but was still visible and audible. If I see an ejected manager anywhere near the playing field the first warning will be a forfeit warning. No one would be allowed to leave the bench to have a conversation with him.

My opinion of ejecting a coach who talked to an ejected manager? It wouldn't happen.

Bainer,

IMO, as soon as you knew what was going on with the jerk manager you properly ejected you should have:

1. halted the game.

2. announced that it would not continue until the ejected manager had left the premises.

3. if he had not left the premises within whatever you considered a reasonable amount of time, announced that the game was suspended and leave it to the league to decide how they want to deal with it.

I actually believe that your second ejection was improper. The second ejection was a result of your failure to enforce the first ejection.

I also believe that you do not have the authority to declare a forfeit in the situation you described, as some have suggested. I applaud your response in saying you would not abuse your legitimate authority in issuing additional ejections to the point that you would have the authority to declare a forfeit.

Now, if the ejected manager refuses to leave and you do suspend the game, if I'm on the league BOD, I might be inclined to declare the game a forfeit. I would certainly be inclined to suspend the offending manager for (at least) the remainder of the season.

But hey, I'm just a coach (and a BOD member), so I could be wrong. ;)

JM

Suspend a game because an ejected manager will not leave the premises? No way coach!

DG,

I believe you suggested the proper remedy in this situation is for the umpire to declare a forfeit.

I do not believe the rules grant the umpire this authority. I believe my suggestions to Bainer are proper and within the authority granted the umpire by the rules.

I am open to being convinced otherwise.

What's your basis? (Cites, please.)

JM

Look, you are the one who said he wouldn't shut up the whole game. That needs to be shut down right away, in no uncertain terms. The fact that you let him get away with so much early is the reason you had problems later.

Ejecting people for violating the rules is not "going nuts," as you call it. I very rarely need to eject anyone, but if they persist in breaking the rules, I am not shy to do so. In your post, you said:

To me, this sounded like things were totally out of control. Players pouring into the crowd? How did this happen? Of course you had to run the second manager. They must have had a third coach on the bench to take over for that guy you just dumped, right? Well, what if they had persisted and you had to dump him, and he was the last coach? That is what I was getting at. You say players left the bench and went into the stands? Warn them to get back on the field, and if they do it again you toss them. That is what I was saying. I did not mean for you to "go nuts" and just start ejecting people left and right without first getting the situation under control. If that is what you thought I meant, then you must think I'm some kind of rook, or a big hot-head on the field. I am neither. I certainly never led my association in ejections, but I take care of "bidness" when I need to!

If all you were looking for was a confirmation that you did the right thing, without hearing any constructive criticism, then you came to the wrong place. If you stopped losing sleep over ejections back in '84, why did you need any opinions about running a coach who blatantly broke the rules? It sounds to me that this ain't your first go-round at the ol' rodeo.

JM-

4.15- a game may be forfeited to the opposing team when a team:

(f) fails to obey within a reasonable amount of time the umpire's order for the removal of a player from the game.


So, the umpires most certainly do have the right to forfeit the game.

JM,

In addition to all the provisions of Rule 4.15, also see:

Rule 9.04(a) - The umpire-in-chief shall stand behind the catcher. (He usually is called the plate umpire.) His duties shall be to:

(6) Decide when a game shall be forfeited.

bossman,

The manager had been removed from the game, and was no longer on the field of play.

While 4.15(f) says "a player", I would certainly agree that it would equally apply to a manager.

However, the umpires' juridstiction applies to "the field of play" - not beyond it.

Reference:

While I would agree that the umpires' authority on the playing field is pretty much absolute, the umpires' authority beyond those bounds is considerably less. This is not a semantic issue.

If the umpire allows other members of the team to continue to communicate with the manager who has been removed from the game, the umpire is derelict in his duty. However, he does not have the authority to declare a forfeit because he allowed it.

JM

Steve,

I would suggest that 9.04(a)(6) is constrained by the conditions defined in 4.15. I don't think they were met in this case.

JM

JM, he actually does, since the members of the team are willfully and persistently violating any rules of the game, after being warned not to do so by the umpire. Rule 4.15(e).

Steve,

Now that is a valid point, and is along the lines of what I was trying to suggest.

Had the umpire, in fact, instructed the remaining coaches/players to refrain from communicating with the ejected coach, and they (willfully?) failed to do so, that would be grounds for a forfeit and the umpire would be within his authority to declare it so.

By my read of Bainer's situation, that didn't happen.

Also, I think it would be better umpiring, given the context, to do as I suggested.

JM

I believe you have a point, John.

Now as I reread Bainer's original post, I see that he did warn the assistant not to permit the players to go into the stands, and neither that coach nor his players heeded that warning. He was well within his rights, in fact absolutely should have run that second coach the moment that any players went back to the stands after being warned.

Steve,

I see what you mean.

I still think it would have been better umpiring to do as I suggested in my reply to Bainer. What do you think?

If the team/coach absolutely refuses to comply with the umpires' instructions, I certainly agree that the umpire has the authority to declare a forfeit.

In my opinion, it is better umpiring not to let it get to that point. It seems to me that there was one a$$hole at this game. Bainer properly, (maybe a little later than he could/should have) ejected him. I would be more favorably impressed with an umpire that simply made him leave (if he could) than one who let it get to a forfeit situation.

JM

I agree, and I think Bainer would agree also. I did not advocate forfeiting the game. I don't like that idea at all. It would be a last resort type of thing.

I do advocate a forfeit
 

If I read the post right:

(1) EJ, then (2) warning not to go into the stands. The purpose of an ejection is punishment to an offender for violation of a the rules/decorum of the game. OBR 4.15: (a game may be forfeited to the other team when) (e) After warning by the umpire, willfully and persistently violates any rules of the game.

The violation is willful and persistent. Shut the game down. Find the scorebook and sign it- 9-0 and let the EJd coach explain to the league president how unfairly he was treated.

Strikes and outs!

I would suggest stopping the game and finding the TD, and informing him that the game will not resume until the ejected coach has departed sight-and-sound range of the field. Then let the TD earn his pay. The ejected coach can decide if his continued presence is worth a forfeit and the ire of the parents around him who came to see their children play ball, not watch an idiot coach throw an extended hissy.

The AC consulting with the ejected coach, warning then eject. If thats all the adults they have on the bench, then your issue has solved itself.

You're right and wrong. While the umpire should've gotten rid of the first guy, it doesn't excuse the second guy and he needed to go, too.

Uncharacteristic Civility
 

I want to complain about the overwhelming display of uncharacteristic civility in this string. You had a chance to turn this thread into something ugly and you blew it! We're not used to seeing people acknowledge the point of view of others.

Keep this up and McGriff's has nothing to worry about.

Rich,

I don't disagree. Ultimately, the 2nd coach earned his ejection as well.

I was just trying to make the point that if the first ejection had been properly enforced, the second one wouldn't have had to happen.

JM

Shut up, scab :D

http://www.nutsacdance.org/

I'm pretty much with the JM on this one.

Eject the manager. Nip it in the bud. Don't let it get to the point it did.

But things happen, so....

Call the assistant coach over. Tell him... "I know exactly what is going on, and if it happens again, you'll be ejected as well. If the manager tries anything more, the game is being halted and the TD is going to remove him from the premises."

If it happens, bye bye to assistant coach (if he was an acting agent, I'm not tossing the coach if the manager is just yelling from the parking lot or whatever). But if players are running out there, ha.

Then we have two coaches in the parking lot and we play again. Not forfeiting until THEY are the only people doing harm. And even then, I'm more inclined to just hand it to the TD. Forfiets should be aboided at all cost because a) I look bad because I couldn't control the game (even if I did everything right) and b) Especially in youth baseball, I'm not going to have a pissing contest between a coach to see who can top who.

JM-

Normally in amateur games, when someone is ejected, the ejected offender has to get out of "sight and sound." That's the policy our association enforces here locally and nobody has a problem with it. So an umpire can certainly forfeit the game if a coach is tring to circumvent his ejection by relaying messages to coaches.

As I said earlier, "My opinion of ejecting a coach who talked to an ejected manager? It wouldn't happen." It wouldn't happen because I am not going to allow an ejected manager any contact with the team. A warning will be issued on first offense. The warning will include the consequence if this continues, and then when it does, game over. The game will not continue after a manager ejection, until I can no longer see or hear him. And as I mentioned earlier, the only game I have ever forfeited was because a manager would not leave the premises. He made a nuisance of himself, from 100 feet away from the field and would not leave. The league adminstration did not take too kindly of his actions, he never coached another game there.

All this from a PBLO game yikes...Some of the old timers in the TO area must be waiting for Noel Crighton to make a return.

In this situation the umps should have cut it off as soon as they became aware of what was happening. I had a similar situation in a Babe Ruth game a couple of years ago.

I was the BU. The PU tosses a manager for questioning his strike zone. (The PU's zone was awful, but that's a whole other story.) Anyway, about an inning after the manager is tossed I see him standing next to his dugout and talking to the team and other ***'t coaches.

I make the PU aware of the situation and tell him that I'll handle it, figuring that if the PU went over it would only exasperate the problem. I informed the manager that he was removed from the game and was not allowed to communicate with his team. With this he starts screaming at me, "What are you going to do, call the police?!"

Now this is not my fight to begin with and I'm certainly not going to get into an arguement with a manager who has already been removed from the game, so I repied in a voice loud enough for some of the parents standing nearby to hear, "Coach, the only call I'm about to make is a forfeit in favor of the other team. It's up to you."

With that I turned and walked away. When I looked back he was gone.

And that is exactly how it should have been.

Eject the first manager. Period. He absolutely knows (and you can surely tell him) that he is required to be out of sight out of sound (ABSOLUTELY NO MORE INVOLVEMENT WITH HIS TEAM.)

Player leaving the dug out... eject him too. Especially if you think he is cavorting with the already ejected coach... or back behind the fence checking your strike zone. His place is in the dugout - not in the stands. whether he is talking to his Momma or his father the coach. In the dugout - ONLY.

The second "ASSistant" coach is discussing with the already ejected coach - EJECT HIM TOO! This is a no brainer.

These are rules that need to be enforced - even in 12 and under games.

Your job is not to try to protect the coaches or keep a violating team in the game. These are the rules, Coach. You violate them and you are ejected. You continue to violate and your team will forfeit. This is not a rule you should bend in the favor of the violating coach.

Shoot, I'll get in my two cents but I'll probably just state what someone else has already said.

When I eject a manager I make sure he leaves. If for some reason I notice that he has come back or later or is relaying messages then I stop the game and warn that unless he's left the park in one minute the game will end.

The "let the coach come sit in the stands in street clothes" thing doesn't work at the parks in which I officiate as there aren't a lot of bleachers. Even the high school parks aren't big enough for the coach to go sit in some far off corner of the stands. For me he needs to be in the parking lot far removed from his teams bench and any players.

This has been a very good subject though because I thought the debate on whether the ump has the right to forfeit a game was very interesting. Both sides made good points.

Eric