Possibly the most ignored rule in baseball?

[TussAgee11]

Anybody see Lastings Milledge for the New York Metropolitans this weekend? Slapping high fives to fans as he ran out to his position in the top of the 11th (maybe 12th?) after hitting his first career homerun to tie the score?

Well, 3.08 (OBR) reads...

"Players in uniform shall not address or mingle with spectators, nor sit in the stands before, during, or after a game. No manager, coach or player shall address any spectator before or during a game. Players of opposing teams shall not fraternize at any time while in uniform."

Well hell, that goes on all the time. How the hell do you police this one, even if you felt like it? And what would the penalty be?

You see it all the time, first baseman talking to the runner, little Johnny going to get a dollar from his Mommy in the stands for a drink. Heck, even an OF tossing the ball into the crowd after the 3rd out of an inning. That could be considered as "addressing".

So what gives about this rule?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Jim Evans offers this:

"Customs and Usage: Until the mid 1970's, it was the umpires' responsibility to monitor the field for 1½ hours prior to the start of a major league game and submit a written report of any fraternization violation. Since that time, the task of upholding the integrity of the game in the public eye has become the responsibility of each club."

This is all the MLBUM has to say on the subject of conduct during the game:

"2.2 CONDUCT OF PLAYERS DURING PROGRESS OF GAME
No one except the manager, coaches (maximum of six), players and substitutes in uniform (including players on the disabled list), bat boys in uniform, two trainers, one member of conditioning staff, and one equipment or property person may occupy the bench or bullpen during the progress of the game. All other personnel must exit the bench or bullpen area before
game time.

Visitors are not allowed on the players' bench or on the field at any time during the progress of the game.

Players in the bench area may not sit in photographer stands adjacent to dugout during the game. During the progress of a game, all players and personnel of a club must be on the bench except when they have some duty to perform as coaches, base runners, batter, or on-deck batter. Players of the side at bat will not be permitted to fraternize with players in the bullpen either of their own or of the visiting club, but must come to their own bench even if, in their judgment, they are not likely to bat in the inning.

Only pitchers, catchers, players serving as catchers, and coaches should be permitted to stay in the bullpen during the game."

[lawump]

For what its worth...according to Ron Luciano in one of his books, Reggie Jackson is responsible for ending enforcement of this rule. According to Luciano, Jackson was always talking to opposing players before the game and getting fined by the League. Jackson said he wanted to talk to other top players to see if he could learn anything that would improve his game, and that he'd be stupid not to talk to them when he had a chance everyday to do so.

Anways, Luciano (as I remember) went on to say that Jackson never paid the fines, and the League never forced the issue when hearing his explanation...in fact they curtailed enforcement of it. And after the 1994-95 strike, MLB encourages positive player/fan interaction.

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

From a credibe source:

Baseball Digest, July, 2001 by Rich Marazzi
Some rules of the game are enforced unevenly

DURING GAME 2 OF THE 2000 World Series played between the Yankees and Mets, TV cameras caught opponents John Franco and David Cone talking to each other over the Yankee Stadium bullpen fence during the seventh inning.

Sandy Alderson, the executive vice president of Baseball Operations, said he would look into it since there were concerns about the rule prohibiting fraternization.

Give me a break, Sandy. Everybody knows there is more socializing going on between players before and during games than a singles pub on Friday night. A section of rule 3.09 reads, "Players of opposing teams shall not fraternize at any time while in uniform."

This aspect of the rule has been referred to as the "Stargell Rule", because of Willie's friendliness with both teammates and opposing players.

But let's not get hung up on all of this. The truth is this rule is simply one rule among many that is seldom enforced. Let's take a look at a few.

(Caution - subject digression, though interesting...it goes on for four pages, so I edited it to just the first for brevity sake.)

Rule 1.14 addresses the size of a fielder's glove. It stipulates that the glove shall not measure more than 12 inches from the tip of any one of the four fingers, through the ball pocket to the bottom edge or heel of the glove." Has anyone ever seen Luis Polonia's glove over the years? From 1988-1991 the little flychaser used a glove that measured almost 17 inches. It looked more like a jai-lai cesta than a fielder's glove and far exceeded the 12-inch limit from the tip to heel. It took awhile, but to give credit where credit is due, the American League subsequently outlawed Polonia's illegal piece of leather.

In recent years, however, if I had to bet, I would say Polonia's glove again violated the rule. But when is the last time you saw an umpire take out a measuring tape to determine whether or not a questionable glove is in violation of the rules?

By the way, if a fielder makes a putout while using an illegal glove, and the manager of the offensive team voices a complaint, the out stands and the player must remove his glove from the game.

Where is the logic here?

The rulebook basically gives a fielder a license to cheat without penalty. If the violation is not corrected within a reasonable time, the umpire has the authority to eject the offender. The illegal glove might have turned a potential triple into an out and all the outfielder gets is a slap on the wrist.

(edited for brevity - if you want more, it's easy to find)

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Almost forgot...the online OBR references this as 3.09 - multiple sources.

Typo?

[TriggerMN]

You want to talk about big gloves, Brett Butler used to wear a butterfly net on his right hand. Varmints would nest in that thing. There was an echo when you spoke into it. Remember when rescue workers pulled baby Jessica out of it?

[bluezebra]

"Heck, even an OF tossing the ball into the crowd after the 3rd out of an inning."

This was established by MLB after the last strike to placate the fans.

Bob

[lawump]

Originally Posted by WhatWuzThatBlue

From a credibe source:

[/i]

Are you suggesting that Ron Luciano is not a credible source? If so, you wouldn't be the first...that why I wrote "for what its worth..."

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by lawump

Are you suggesting that Ron Luciano is not a credible source? If so, you wouldn't be the first...that why I wrote "for what its worth..."

What would not be considered credible about Luciano? He was a great storyteller and loved the game of baseball. He wrote the books The Umpire Strikes Back, Strike Two, and The Rise And Fall Of The Roman Umpire. The books are full of historical data, and are very well written as well as funny. Anybody who has something bad to say about Luciano is just a fat-basher, the same as the pukes that bashed Eric Gregg and John McSherry. Ron Luciano is a very credible source, and I just can't understand anyone saying differently.

[lawump]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

What would not be considered credible about Luciano? He was a great storyteller and loved the game of baseball. He wrote the books The Umpire Strikes Back, Strike Two, and The Rise And Fall Of The Roman Umpire. The books are full of historical data, and are very well written as well as funny. Anybody who has something bad to say about Luciano is just a fat-basher, the same as the pukes that bashed Eric Gregg and John McSherry. Ron Luciano is a very credible source, and I just can't understand anyone saying differently.

First, I own all three books you cited and I loved them. Though I was in pro ball, it was long after Ron had left the game. As for the books, the first two you cited, might be two of the only books that actually made me laugh HARD outloud.

As to their credibility...I have no personal opinion as most of the stories told in the books happened before I was born. However...I have had some umpires tell me that Mr. Luciano "took some liberties".

Again, I have no idea if his books are word for word true, but numerous people have suggested otherwise (to me personally and to others). What their motive was for so suggesting is beyond me. The motive may have been legit or may have arisen for some other reason.

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Sometimes I am amazed at the battles I must fight.

1) I wasn't implying that Luciano wasn't THE credible source. Read it again.

2) The first response concerning that tag line was the one expected.
Now, do you get it?

3) Please don't try to hijack this thread too.
Yes, you know who I am writing about.

[BlueLawyer]

Although, if I wanted to, I would. So here goes:

The most infamous incident in my memory in baseball is . . .

The George Brett/Tim McClelland pine tar incident.

Everybody on this board knows the rule, knows the opposing team's protest, and knows that Tim McClelland was 110% in the right.

A tape measure is not amongst the standard equipment I carry onto the field. I have thought about it recently, though, because I have observed this year a rather strange habit of teams putting tape on their bats more than 18" above the knob. Until the other team protests, though, I ain't hunting for fights. Zega at the pregame conference: "Are your players properly and legally equipped?" Coach: "yeah." Zega: "Let's play."

The point is this . . . we enforce some rules on our observation- we enforce some on the other team's protest. Some, like this one, we enforce not at all.

Strikes and outs!

[lawump]

Originally Posted by WhatWuzThatBlue

Sometimes I am amazed at the battles I must fight.

1) I wasn't implying that Luciano wasn't THE credible source. Read it again.

As has happened before, your post was not entirely clear to me...that's why I put my response to your prior post in the form of a question...I did not state that you were referring to Mr. Luciano, I was asking if you were (please note the use of a question mark in my prior post)...then I just noted that others have questioned Mr. Luciano's credibility, too.

I certainly was not trying to start a "battle" over this. You know, everytime I respond to one of your posts...its not to start a diatribe against you...sometimes I do post to agree with you.

As for your statement about hijacking this (or any) thread (whomever you are talking to): Can you say, "Hi Mr. Kettle, I'm Mr. Pot".

[NFump]

WHAT? WWTB hijack a thread? NEVER!

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

lawump,
We have recently agreed on a couple of topics, so maybe this is a turning point. I don't dispute that I am opinionated and egotistical - hell, I am an umpire after all. However, 'hijacking' a thread connotes that the subject is left behind and that the expected end point is not part of the new itinerary. I think you'll find that I try to keep on topic - even if it includes a few jabs, barbs and zingers. I believe that we have a few members that are better examples of tangental thinkers. Anyway, it's nice to know that on the other threads we can actually agree.