What do YOU think?

[UmpJM]

My thanks to all who have replied. After Garth's "that's a different question..." reply, I realized that I had not worded my initial question very well.

What I meant to ask was, based on what the linked rules say should the OBR rules or the FED rules be used to adjudicate all the things which are not covered in the linked "House Rules".

As you now know, it says two different things in two different places. (Similarly, for the house softball leagues, in one place it specifies ASA & in another NFHS.) I am of the opinion that the specification of OBR "trumps" the specification of NFHS because immediately following the specification of NFHS as what I referred to as the "foundation rules", the rules also include the statement:

The DYBA General Rules supercede specific instances of the NFHS rules and should be followed preferentially.

The "DYBA General Rules" is the section that specifies OBR as the "foundation rules". So, I believe that a "literalist" reading of the rules say that OBR takes precedence over FED in the adjudication of the league's games. I also am quite confident that the league's INTENT is that the FED rules be used as the basic playing rules.

While I too have a deep-seated aversion to "local rules", I have come to the conclusion that they are an inevitable annoyance. If they are going to exist, I believe they should be as few as possible and as "good" as possible.

While I have no intention of volunteering to rewrite these rules, I am planning to send a few observations regarding them to the individual who is in charge of these rules.

From a pragmatic point of view, I can only remember two occasions in four years of coaching in this league where a FED/OBR rule difference would have had an impact on the proper ruling in a game situation, so it's not that big a deal.

I was curious to see how the umpires on the forum would read the rules in responding to my question.

I genuinely appreciate those of you who took the time to respond. Thanks.

John