Coaches outside dugout

[clips2]

1 is a dead ball and award the 2 bases.
2 is the batter is out for interference by the coach

[UmpJM]

clips2,

What if...

In 1, it was the offensive coach on a bucket outside the dugout entrance

and/or

In 2, it was the defensive coach?

Would this affect your suggested rulings?

JM

[David B]

Originally Posted by clips2

1 is a dead ball and award the 2 bases.
2 is the batter is out for interference by the coach

As Coach JM suggested, this is not so cut and dry.

Might need to rethink this one as it really depends upon intent of those involved.

Looked in my book for a ruling and couldn't find a FED ruling that suggested a dead ball without intent.

OBR is pretty much the same and I believe NCAA even has a ruling to keep it live??

Thanks
David

[clips2]

interference is interference...specially if it is a defefensive coach...how can he argue when he is not allowed on field unless he is requesting time after a play. bucket is not a piece of equipment allowed on field and team has to be responsible for that and take the penalty like a man

[UmpJM]

Hmmm....

So, if I understand you correctly, you would award the defense an out because a defensive coach interfered with a (defensive) fielder's attempt to catch a pop fly.

Groundbreaking ruling, to say the least.

I would very much enjoy being the offensive manager (who was in his dugout, like he was supposed to be, by the way) when you made this call.

JM

[DG]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

Hmmm....

So, if I understand you correctly, you would award the defense an out because a defensive coach interfered with a (defensive) fielder's attempt to catch a pop fly.

Groundbreaking ruling, to say the least.

I would very much enjoy being the offensive manager (who was in his dugout, like he was supposed to be, by the way) when you made this call.

JM

Very interesting.

My first reaction to 1) was rule as if the ball went into the dugout. My first reaction to 2) was interference. But then the curve ball is thrown and we consider who was sitting on the bucket.

But don't enjoy the situation too much.

[UmpJM]

Don,

Originally Posted by DG

But don't enjoy the situation too much.

Good advice.

Since you brought it up, which of:

"mealy-mouthed", "transparent", and "draconian"

do you think would get me tossed in a game?

JM

[DG]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

Don,



Good advice.

Since you brought it up, which of:

"mealy-mouthed", "transparent", and "draconian"

do you think would get me tossed in a game?

JM

Personal, prolonged, or profane will get you tossed. It would depend on what you said while you were mealy-mouthed, transparent, or dracanian whether one of the 2P's applied. The prolonged P is a function of time and would probably be the last P. Given enough time the other two P's will appear but if not, rolonged will get rid of the argument.

It's a mute discussion, however, because I don't allow coaches on buckets outside the dugout.

[David B]

Originally Posted by clips2

interference is interference...specially if it is a defefensive coach...how can he argue when he is not allowed on field unless he is requesting time after a play. bucket is not a piece of equipment allowed on field and team has to be responsible for that and take the penalty like a man

Now if you could just give me the rule to back up your decision.

Sure the bucket is not supposed to be on the field but it still requires "intent"

Same as with the photograper, kids warming up in live ball territory, etc.,

Thansk
David

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by David B

Now if you could just give me the rule to back up your decision.

Sure the bucket is not supposed to be on the field but it still requires "intent"

Same as with the photograper, kids warming up in live ball territory, etc.,

Thansk
David

Somewhere, there's a FED ruling (might be in one of the yearly interps) to the effect that an umpire should judge what would have happened to a thrown ball that hits equipment left outside the dugout, and rule accordingly.

IMO, the benefit of the doubt goes to the team that didn't have the equipment / bucket outside the dugout.

[UmpJM]

Bob,

From FED 1-3-7:

PENALTY: If loose equipment interferes with play, the umpire may call an out(s), award bases or return runners, based on his judgement and the circumstances concerning the play.

JM

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Somewhere, there's a FED ruling (might be in one of the yearly interps) to the effect that an umpire should judge what would have happened to a thrown ball that hits equipment left outside the dugout, and rule accordingly.

IMO, the benefit of the doubt goes to the team that didn't have the equipment / bucket outside the dugout.

You're right.
Fed 1-3-7
Under penalty
If loose equipment interferes with play, the umpire may call an out(s), award bases or return runners, based on his judgement and the circumstances concerning the play.

I love these total judgement penalties

[Daryl H. Long]

1): Equipment must be inside the dugout or in a dead ball area.

NF Rule 1-3-7...loose equipment, such as gloves, bats, helmets, or catcher's gear, of either team, may not be on or near the field

Penalty: If loose equipment interferes with the play, the umpire may call an out(s), award bases or return runners, based on his judgement and the circumstances concerning the play.

2) People must be inside the dugout unless authorized to be out.

NF Rule3-3-1a.

A coach, player, substitute, attendant or other bench personnel shall not leave the dugout during a live ball for an unauthorized purpose.

Penalty: At the end of playing action, the umpire shall issue a warning to the coach of the team involved and the next offender on that team shall be ejected.

Therefore, it is illegal for a coach or any player etc to sit on a bucket outside the dugout at any time. Nor may any equipment be left lying in live ball area. Umpires must be diligent to make sure these two basic rules are followed. I mention it briefly at pregame meeting with coaches as a preventative measure and so far I have never had to invoke any of the penalties listed above.

[DG]

Coaches sitting outside the dugout on buckets is no longer a problem around here. Players coming out to congratulate runners who have scored still is.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by clips2

interference is interference...specially if it is a defefensive coach...how can he argue when he is not allowed on field unless he is requesting time after a play. bucket is not a piece of equipment allowed on field and team has to be responsible for that and take the penalty like a man

So you're going to reward the defense for screwing up? Interesting concept.