LL Bat Question

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by PWL

Does that mean one piece wood bats? Do they have to be BESR certified? Does it mention anything about composite bats? How big is the diameter of the barrel allowed to be? Is paint the only restriction?

I would submit that there are places in Texas where you could find a LL rulebook and figure it out, but I'm willing to humor you.



Rule 1.10 – The bat must be a baseball bat which meets Little League specifications and standards as noted in this rule. It shall be a smooth, rounded stick and made of wood or of material color tested and proved acceptable to Little League standards. It shall not be more than thirty-three (33) inches (34 inches for Junior; 36 inches for Big and Senior League) in length, nor more than two and one-quarter (2 ¼) inches for Little League, 2 ¾ inches for Junior, and 2 ¾ for wood-2 5/8 non wood for Senior and Big League in diameter, and if wood, not less than fifteen-sixteenth (15/16) inches in diameter (7/8 inch for bats less than 30”) at its smallest part. Bats may be taped or fitted with a sleeve for a distance not exceeding sixteen (16) inches (18 inches for Junior/Senior/Big League Baseball) from the small end. Senior/Big League baseball a bat shall not weigh, numerically, more than three ounces less than the length of the bat (e.g., a 33-inch-long bat cannot be less than 30 ounces).


Tim.

[LLPA13UmpDan]

Well the reason i ask, I note that since alumminum bats came out, i have never seen LL using them. I looked in the book and could not find if they were prohibited or not. I didnt see it until BigUmp pointed where it was at describing that they are allowed. I think its a good thing to ask on the board, as im sure someout there is wondering that same question. It's very little known that one can be used, since almost everyone uses metal ones.

[LLPA13UmpDan]

Tim C, im sick you. Stay out of my threads unless u have something that answers my question. I over-looked that section by mistake, not knowing thats where it would be, after it makes no sense really where they put it, "objectives of the game". after all, the "rules" are not there. Should have a section on approved equipment. anyhow, Good-bye now, delete your post, as a matter of fact, account please

[BigUmp56]

Dan:

Tim's right on this. You need to take the innitiative to learn some of these basic rules on your own. We'll all be glad to help you as you progress, but unless you're willing to do most of the leg work on your own, your rules knowledge won't improve. I'd suggest putting a rule book in your bathroom to read while your answering mothers natures call. At first the rule book can be a little confusing and seem unorganized, but in time you'll be able to claw your way through it to dig out those hard to find rulings if you'll stick your nose in it more often.


Tim.

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by LLPA13UmpDan

Tim C, im sick you. Stay out of my threads unless u have something that answers my question. I over-looked that section by mistake, not knowing thats where it would be, after it makes no sense really where they put it, "objectives of the game". after all, the "rules" are not there. Should have a section on approved equipment. anyhow, Good-bye now, delete your post, as a matter of fact, account please

So now you don't like the rule book layout. You don't think it's set up correctly, either. You seem to be like many others in this society - you want everything handed to you! That doesn't happen here, little man!

It was suggested that you read the rule book on other threads. That means you open the book and start at page 1. You will find a world of answers in even the LL rule book. There are even more enlightenments in the LL book titled The Right Call. But that would mean that you would have to read the LL rule book first and we see that is not happening.

Now, let me inform you about something. If you handle you games like you handle the criticism on this board, I pity your assigner. He will be plagued with complaints about you.

In closing, from what I have read of your posts, you have a long way to go to become much of anything. Sorry, but I call them off the field just as I do on the field - as I see them!

[LilLeaguer]

Originally Posted by Tim C

"Tim has long established that he doesn't care about basic issues of game management like player eligibility, which is why he'd be eaten alive by Little League managers."

OK, I'm caught . . . you write for Leno and you're just acting like a child, right?

"Eaten alive by a Little League manager" . . . this is really getting funny.

I do not worry about "player eligibilty" as in real baseball that is not a real umpire's responsibility.

Give me a break.

Read a rule book, umpire some games and get back to me.

Thanks for writing in full thoughts with periods and stuff, that was cool.

Regards,

Tim, you shouldn't be able to read this. You may want to report to the site administration that the Ignore list isn't working.

On the other hand, I don't know to whom you should report that you can't read. You are misquoting me again. A hint: Dan didn't call you out on your Little League game management skills; LilLeaguer did. Thanks for the compliment on my writing skills, though.

As to why you need to bluster about your ability to manage a game in an organization that you don't want to work in, I could theorize, but I don't believe in pop psychology over the internet. In Little League games, an umpire's lack of knowledge about player eligibility may well be critical, and I have known games that went seriously off the rails because of that. Now, perhaps, you could have kept those games under control, but since you aren't even willing to take on the basic responsibilities of a trained Little League umpire, I have to quote Garth, "coulda woulda shoulda."

[LilLeaguer]

Originally Posted by LLPA13UmpDan

Tim C, im sick you. Stay out of my threads unless u have something that answers my question. I over-looked that section by mistake, not knowing thats where it would be, after it makes no sense really where they put it, "objectives of the game". after all, the "rules" are not there. Should have a section on approved equipment. anyhow, Good-bye now, delete your post, as a matter of fact, account please

If I may make some suggestions, but first some background.

Hardly anybody here is exclusively a Little League umpire, even though Little League probably has more umpires than any other baseball organization in the United States. In any case, while the folks here would rather discuss the arcane NFHS FPSR (which even highly professional and fearsome High School Varsity Managers sometimes don't understand) or the NCAA DH rule (which, I'm afraid, even God might not understand), they know they are in danger of being swamped out by Little League questions. Since many of them are very basic (instead of the intracacies of runner's interference as a recent thread discussed) as well, you'll find a certain resistance to them on this forum.

• Post LL-specific questions over at umpire.org. The Small Diamond forum discusses those issues, can certainly answer the basic questions (like where to find Rule 1.10). In fact, some of the posters here also frequent that board. 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.
• Don't answer questions, unless you have experience that bears on the answer. Nothing is more frustrating (and you can see it all the time) than an answer to an OBR (MLB) rules situation with a NFHS (Fed) rule. Well, a Little League answer to just about any question seems to be more frustrating in this forum.
• Be respectful and gracious. Respectful means that you do your research thoroughly before posting, and gracious means that you thank folks for pointing out information you didn't know before, like when Tim pointed out that Rule 1.00 has important information.
• What to do about the bullies? I don't really know, but I know that antagonizing them often ends in threads being locked or even deleted. (Apparently, the innocuous statement that "some umpires suck" becomes "specific posters suck," and that way lies harsh moderation.) In any case, back and forth insults don't really accomplish anything but lowering the signal-noice ratio even further.

Of course, you are free to do what you want with this advice. If you want to keep this forum as a resource in your learning, though, you may want to make some changes.

[Jurassic Referee]

Gentleman, I am shocked......shocked, I tell ya......at the reception that you people have given LittleLeagueDan.

From his posts, I have deduced that Dan is but fifteen years of age. Well, I'm here to tell you that with Dan's obvious intelligence, enthusiasm and wisdom, I am sure....nay, certain....that one day Dan has a excellent chance of being sixteen.

Carry on.

[LMan]

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, certain....that one day Dan has a excellent chance of being sixteen.

Nah, I'm taking the under

[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]

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.

[SanDiegoSteve]

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."

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by LLPA13UmpDan

Tim C, im sick you. Stay out of my threads unless u have something that answers my question. I over-looked that section by mistake, not knowing thats where it would be, after it makes no sense really where they put it, "objectives of the game". after all, the "rules" are not there. Should have a section on approved equipment. anyhow, Good-bye now, delete your post, as a matter of fact, account please

Does anyone know what "im sick you" means?

Dan ... you've shown over and over that you REALLY need to read the basics part of the book. Most of your questions about things you simply can't find are in the opening chapters of the book. The ones that deal with definitions, objectives, and basics. The rest of the book HINGES on a complete understanding of these sections. COMPLETE understanding. Not a passing knowledge of these sections. Often, a rule in a section you've probably read 8 times, will not make sense in every situation to which it applies (or you may think it applies in a situation where it doesn't) if you don't have 100% total understanding of the definitions and objectives section.

You seem to treat these sections as superfluous - they are not - they are your foundation.

Tim treats you with such disdain because you've repeatedly shown a lack of willingness to "get" this section of the book ... which leads to faulty understanding of pretty much everything else. Too bad you're "tired of him", as if you'd sift through the disdain, you'd find that he's been directing you all along toward what you really need to do if you want to be good at this.

[LilLeaguer]

Originally Posted by Tim C

You've ignored my question:

My question has nothing to do with metal bats . . .

It has to do with YOU investing in your umpire career. The answer was in Rule 1 . . . I mean that would be where you START to read a rule book.

Wrong. (It's so cool to be able to answer Tim with impertinence.)

Somebody who aspires to be a "real" Little League umpire needs to start reading the rules at very beginning of the book. The section titled "Official Regulations" and having sections with Roman numerals is also important; it has gems about pitcher eligibility and remediation that might come up.

Of course, Tim has long established that he doesn't care about basic issues of game management like player eligibility, which is why he'd be eaten alive by Little League managers.

Originally Posted by Tim C

Dan, over-and-over you have shown that you do little research for yourself . . . you just ask -- umpiring is learning and I am not sure you are even trying to do that function.

I will now leave you to founder in your umpire career.

Regards,

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by LilLeaguer

Of course, Tim has long established that he doesn't care about basic issues of game management like player eligibility, which is why he'd be eaten alive by Little League managers.

Lil,

I hardly think that Tee would get eaten alive by any managers, much less Little League managers. I would submit that Tee would send any such manager packing in a heartbeat who got up the nerve to try to intimidate him.

I have yet to encounter an intimidating Little League manager. So very few of them have any knowledge of the rules whatsoever, and most wouldn't have any clue about eligibility rules. Every time I've seen an argument about eligibilty issues, they always need to consult with a director or board member to straighten it out.

I certainly don't put up with a whole lot when dropping down to work Little League, and I doubt that Tee would, if he ever worked that level just for kicks.