Rules We Don't Like

[PeteBooth]

There will always be rules that we do not like.

My biggest "beef" with the rules is that IMO too much is placed on blue with respect to safety and controlling the game compared to when I played.

When I played, the participants "policed" themselves. Blue simply had to call the game. Not so today. In addition to knowing the rules etc. we have to stop games because of "trash talk" etc.

In my day we didn't have to worry about trash talk. It was taken care of on the field of play and was accepted. Today you have riots.

Then we have all this "safety business" to worry about because of the Liability factor. Someone is looking for that easy "big pay day" etc. As it stands now, we have to get to the game site early to check hats / bats. IMO, that should be the coaches job not ours. If a kid does come to bat with an illegal bat, then we simply enforce the rule which in FED is an out. However, the original checking etc. should be on the coach.

The other issue is the on-deck batter. Because of the incident in the Witchita St game, we are told to strictly enforce the rule and make sure the on-deck batter is on his/her own side.

The Catcher's equipment. If a kid is squatting down then he needs to have a helmet / mask on. Also, the proper throat guard. etc.

In a nutshell, the Safety Requirements should be the responsibilty of (1) The parents. When my kids played I made sure they had the proper equipment and (2) the coaches.

Our job is to call the game, however, in todays; environment not only do we need to be umpires but psycologists and policemen as well.

Pete Booth

[greymule]

we have to stop games because of "trash talk" etc.

The psychology has changed since I played in the 1960s and early 1970s. There was plenty of "bench jockeying" and wisecracking from the stands back then, but the worst thing you could do was be a "rabbit ears" and react to jibes from the other team or hecklers in the stands. Anyone who let somebody's mouth get to him was "bush league." But today, it's almost as if the players feel obliged to retaliate with more than words out of fear of being considered cowards.

(I will admit that in the "old" days, the players and even the loudmouthed fans usually stayed within unwritten but understood boundaries. No using the player's name, no obscenities, and so on. And the remarks were supposed to contain some degree of cleverness, however crude.)

[etn_ump]

I will probably get trashed here for mentioning this, but, the Fed rule I dislike the most is the FPSR and contact rules, particlularly players not being able to break up a double play or roll the catcher.

I was a HS and later a D1 catcher (in the '70's) and I really don't understand the rules regarding contact. Catchers and middle infielders both learn how to protect themselves, it's part of baseball.

Don't roast me too hard on this one, you asked which rules I didn't like!

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by etn_ump

I will probably get trashed here for mentioning this, but, the Fed rule I dislike the most is the FPSR and contact rules, particlularly players not being able to break up a double play or roll the catcher.

Ditto.....

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Ditto.....

I don't understand why either of you would preferr to see a runner allowed to crash the catcher or make contact on the pivot man at second in a high school game. These are young men playing and should be afforded the protection that the FPSR rule provides.


Tim.

[DG]

I don't understand why any rule set would allow a runner to maliciously contact a catcher.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by DG

I don't understand why any rule set would allow a runner to maliciously contact a catcher.

I suppose I can see it still being allowed at the professional level as a matter of tradition. But for any level lower than that, especially with teenagers still in school, no way.


Tim.

[etn_ump]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

I don't understand why either of you would preferr to see a runner allowed to crash the catcher or make contact on the pivot man at second in a high school game. These are young men playing and should be afforded the protection that the FPSR rule provides.


Tim.

Because it's baseball, not golf. And I never said anything about malicious contact, malicious contact has no place anywhere in baseball. I like the college rules for contact much better.

Remember, the title of this topic, Rules you don't like.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by etn_ump

Because it's baseball, not golf. And I never said anything about malicious contact, malicious contact has no place anywhere in baseball. I like the college rules for contact much better.

Remember, the title of this topic, Rules you don't like.

Would you have the FPSR ammended to model NCAA, which appears even more stringent?


Tim.

[DG]

Originally Posted by etn_ump

Because it's baseball, not golf. And I never said anything about malicious contact, malicious contact has no place anywhere in baseball. I like the college rules for contact much better.

Remember, the title of this topic, Rules you don't like.

You said "players not being able to break up a double play or roll the catcher". What did you mean by "roll the catcher"? I took that to mean maliciously, since you are allowed a hard legal slide into the catcher.

There are more violent sports than MLB. NFL and NHL come to mind, but there are malicious actions that will get you ejected, fined and suspended and many more unsportsmanlike stuff that will get penalties. Why MLB still allows one of the team's most important investments to get crashed malicously is beyond me.

[D-Man]

I think they should be able to bring weapons on the field.

Back in the day they could police themselves. You crash my catcher, I'll put one in your ear. Tony C. was a pussy.

I hate the tobacco rule. What's better than swallowing a nice plug o' Red Man while taking one for the team...

While you're at it, make 'em all wear wool in the summer. Didn't have the new fangled Under Armour in my day.

Yeah, those were better times!

[MadCityRef]

NCAA has altered the FPSR for '07 so the runner can slide through the bag, because so many couldn't stop.
NFHS is all about player safety because most players are not as talented as the few who will play at the next level.
I think the on-deck batter in his circle is a POE in 07 for NFHS. This is not enforced enough. It saves what, 5 seconds? It comes from the LL and BRuth ball trying to speed up the game. (Call more strikes.) This is another liability issue we need to clean up. If the player is not where he is supposed to be, and we allow it to happen, then we are on the hook. It sucks for us, but we gotta do it.

A rule I'd change is the batter intentionally getting HBP on a 3-ball count. (I must be a magnet for it.) There's no penalty, but there should be. Stay in the box or call him out. But try and sell that one for an out.
The worst call I hate making is the interference on the FPSR. No one is watching as they follow the ball. Had one coach tell me, "We'll be looking very close at your calls at second from now on." Oh, please.

[DG]

Originally Posted by MadCityRef

A rule I'd change is the batter intentionally getting HBP on a 3-ball count. (I must be a magnet for it.) There's no penalty, but there should be. Stay in the box or call him out. But try and sell that one for an out.
The worst call I hate making is the interference on the FPSR. No one is watching as they follow the ball. Had one coach tell me, "We'll be looking very close at your calls at second from now on." Oh, please.

No sale on (getting an out) getting hit by a 4th ball. That's just stupid on the batter's part.

Under OBR it's not normally interference, but under NCAA and NFHS it's a rule expected to be called, so I have no problem calling it. As BU it's not my first responsibililty but I know PU will be watching for this per our pre-game.

[Justme]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

There will always be rules that we do not like.

Ain't that the truth

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

Our job is to call the game, however, in todays; environment not only do we need to be umpires but psycologists and policemen as well.

I agree with you once again. I wonder if the additional umpire responsibilities, and the hassles associated with enforcing them, aren’t a major reason that recruiting young umpires is so difficult. I’m sure it adds to the number of veteran umpires who walk away from the game too.

My siblings and I grew up in the 50’s & 60’s; I wonder how we survived without all of the rules to protect us from ourselves.