The Official Forum - LL Bat Question

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)

- - LL Bat Question (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/28314-ll-bat-question.html)

Now, I do sometimes post questions here, but I try to frame them in terms of the interests and experience of most of the posters.

I joined this late but IMO your aforementioned statement is not true.

What TEE and others are trying to tell you is this.

Do some homework first.

Since Dan is young let's put it in his terms. He has an English class and he was told to read Shakespear's Hamlet. The next day the teacher comes in and starts asking questions about Hamlet. Some teachers pick at random.

The teacher asks Dan some basic questions about the play and Dan stays silent.

The first question from the teacher will be "Dan did you read the play"

That is all that is being done here. No-one has a problem answering questions to try and help someone but when it's apparent that an individual didn't take the time to read, that is what annoys people.

Here's an example of a valid question after reading the OBR rule-book. B1 grounds to F6, beats the play but misses first base.

Question? does the runner have to be tagged to be put out or can F3 simply make a valid appeal and step on the bag.

Answer: It depends upon the type of action ie; Relaxed vs. Unrelaxed.

One will not find those terms in the rule-book , hence a valid question.

Therefore, to sum up IMO posters here will answer anything even if they are not particularly interested in the subject matter, but they also do not want to get "hosed" either when it's apparent that someone does not want to do home-work ala when we get FED test questions posted on this site to help someone past the test without reading the rule / case book.

Pete Booth

Still confusing, I see

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

Now, I do sometimes post questions here, but I try to frame them in terms of the interests and experience of most of the posters.

I joined this late but IMO your aforementioned statement is not true.

What TEE and others are trying to tell you is this.

Do some homework first.

Since Dan is young let's put it in his terms. He has an English class and he was told to read Shakespear's Hamlet. The next day the teacher comes in and starts asking questions about Hamlet. Some teachers pick at random.

The teacher asks Dan some basic questions about the play and Dan stays silent.

The first question from the teacher will be "Dan did you read the play"

That is all that is being done here. No-one has a problem answering questions to try and help someone but when it's apparent that an individual didn't take the time to read, that is what annoys people.

Here's an example of a valid question after reading the OBR rule-book. B1 grounds to F6, beats the play but misses first base.

Question? does the runner have to be tagged to be put out or can F3 simply make a valid appeal and step on the bag.

Answer: It depends upon the type of action ie; Relaxed vs. Unrelaxed.

One will not find those terms in the rule-book , hence a valid question.

Therefore, to sum up IMO posters here will answer anything even if they are not particularly interested in the subject matter, but they also do not want to get "hosed" either when it's apparent that someone does not want to do home-work ala when we get FED test questions posted on this site to help someone past the test without reading the rule / case book.

Pete Booth

LilLeaguer made the quoted remark above as advice to LLDan. From your response, it's not clear if you made the distinction.

LLDan is the young umpire that posts LL questions on this board. I'm the woman:) who just annoys the heck out of people, apparently. You are free to judge that my questions are not of general interest (though you made a thoughtful response to my last one), of course.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LilLeaguer

LLDan is the young umpire that posts LL questions on this board. I'm the woman:) who just annoys the heck out of people, apparently.

Quite an androgenous "person," aren't you? I guess I'll just call you "Pat.":)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim C

"Quote:
Originally Posted by LilLeaguer
And besides that mantra that Real Umpires umpire, I don't understand the reason not to explain the rule, again if asked.

"If I'm acting in my role as umpire, I answer umpire questions only. I "know" some of the IHSA suspension / eligibility rules, but I won't give an answer to those questions on the field. I won't give a pitching clinic, or a rules clinic, or umpiring philosophy, ... on the field either. I have, and will, talk to groups during scrimmages (and I understand that word means different things in different areas -- here it's really just another practice) about almost anything related to the sport."

A "real umpire" understands that knowledge of the rules of baseball is a two way street.

Like Bob, I often go to pre-season scrimmages and help TEACH rules.

In fact, as the 1st Vice President - Rules of my local association part of my duties are to go to coaching clinics (meetings) and explain not only new rules but how all rules can be interpreted.

Once a game begins I don't "splain" nuttin'.

I don't even offer options (my bad, I know) . . . all coaches need to invest in learning also.

There is a place in baseball (small diamond) for people who just love the game, to umpire. They should umpire their games as they want . . . if they want to explain rules, keep track of non-umpire issues, care about particpants qualifications they should be allowed that right.

They should also understand that they will always be Smitty's and should be happy with the low level games they work.

Regards,

If you don't want to respect my decision to work Little League, Little League level ball, or my umpiring skills, that's fine. I'm not trying to "win you over." And, even without that respect, I've learned a lot from you in particular, and your advice has changed the way I umpire, so this exchange works for me. I think that in following it, I'm a better Little League umpire. I'm sorry that my learning process seems to frustrate so many on this forum.

Situation 2. OBR (American League) rules. The defensive manager wants to move the pitcher to left field and bring in a new pitcher. He asks you, the umpire, where the new pitcher should go in the lineup. Will you answer? If he asks if the new pitcher bats in place of the DH in the order, will you correct him?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim C

Honest guys I will not participate in a clearly defined Little League thread again

yeah, riiiiight ;)

......it's addicting, isn't it? :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Well, I'm here to tell you that with Dan's obvious intelligence, enthusiasm and wisdom, I am sure....nay, <b>certain</b>....that one day Dan has a excellent chance of being sixteen.

Nah, I'm taking the under ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by DG

Has anyone spotted a wood bat lately in a youth game? If so was it black?

I just bought a lottery ticket and I think my odds are about the same.

I used a blue ("factory" :rolleyes: ) painted bat in LL one year. In 1974, IIRC. I'm not sure aluminum had been invented yet....

Mmmmmmmmm .......................

Quote:

Originally Posted by LilLeaguer

I put myself in the habit of occasionally using the feminine pronoun in the general case in the late 70's. At the time, I suppose, I felt that it was a way to challenge assumptions of gender roles and help folks break free of their prejudices.

Thanks goodness that isn't necessary anymore :rolleyes:, but I have kept the habit.

The only thing stranger than your "affectation" is the explanation and continual usage of it.:confused:

awww, you gotta love when others just want to help you out and 'free you from your prejudices', whether you want to be or not :rolleyes:

Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha.....snort......bwahahaha hahaha....cough..cough...hahaha..gag.....clunk!

Dan, that is damn funny.:D

:D Good, can we all now take a left turn now and get back in the right direction

Well, now if you're going to get redundant now, okay.