This is probably the most sensible solution.

Thanks.

Tim.

Tim I do not know who assigns Babe Ruth in your area.

I do not umpire Babe Ruth but in my summer association, the assignor attends most of the league meetings for the clients we serve. We have a summer meeting after the HS season is over to go over a variety of items including the rules for the various leagues we service.

If there is a rule that is "Written in stone" as seems to be the case with this rule, then have your assignor contact the president of the league and tell them that the coaches are giving the umpires a hard time.

The problem is either corrected or you simply do not service them anymore. There's plenty of other leagues around.

Normally I do not discuss rules at the Plate Conference but in this instance It might be a good idea to mention this particular rule at the Plate Conference.

As far as liabilty goes can't answer but to my knowledge that is the only rule I have heard of requiring a coach to wear a mask. Under all other codes, a coach does not have to meet this criteria.

Pete Booth

Tim,

I don't enforce this at the local league level, however, I do mention to them when they come out that they're supposed to have a mask on. This usually gets them to start sending out one of their bench players to warm up the pitcher(yes, he has a mask on). At District and State levels(and beyond as well), it's enforced. Usually the response is the typical that's crap, first time I've ever had it enforced or heard of it but never any "heated" arguments.

Only three types of people would w/up P with no mask, the retarded, the moronic and the imbecilic. And the idiotic, sorry, that makes four.:eek:

Successful litigation is worthless without successful collections of the monetary awards. If you have no assets, other than your ump fees, then what's the issue?:(

This is worth multiple heated arguments?

:confused:

Stand on the plate until coach gets a mask. Then enforce the time limit for change overs. I fail to see either the problem or the relevance for argument. YMOD.

I'm not sure I understand your point. That is unless this was a veiled insult implying that I have no attatchable assets.


Tim.

It's insulting to be poor? :(

Litigation cost money. If you litigate a turnip for blood, you're a fool. If you are a turnip, then you have no problems with being litigated. If you're smart and have exposed assets, then you know how to remove them from being attached. If you have assets and you expose them to atachment via litigation, then you get what you deserve. Any more than this and I will have to charge you. If you don't pay, I will litigate you. If you are exposed, which I bet you are.

:)

FINALLY, someone on this board used the word 'Weltanschauung'. I was beginning to think that we were all doomed to lives of quiet desperation.

mbyron,

As I would guess you were able to tell, my brother got the overly generous allotment of both brains and sense of humor in the family. ;)

JM