Got in trouble for this ejection

[PeteBooth]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

From the OP

[QUOTE]

I put the ball back into play and he sends the runner from third with no attempt to try to score and then he sends the runner from second to get him tagged out.[/QUOTE]

If you are going to allow the aforementioned in one of your games - Go ahead. All that can come out of this is ugliness. The object of the game of baseball is to try and score more runs than your opponent not to Give them outs.

I do not have a problem if I have to stay there "all day" as long as the teams are indeed playing the game of baseball.

The reason the HT coach is employing the tactics he did is to EXTEND the game. He was not playing the game of baseball. In fact IMO it is the coach who is "cheating"

When there's only 3 minutes left on the clock and the team is employing shenanigans then it's time to go home because if the HT played the game the way they should in the first place the game would have indeed ended after 6.

Pete Booth

[GarthB]

[QUOTE=PeteBooth][QUOTE]


From the OP

If you are going to allow the aforementioned in one of your games - Go ahead. All that can come out of this is ugliness. The object of the game of baseball is to try and score more runs than your opponent not to Give them outs.

I do not have a problem if I have to stay there "all day" as long as the teams are indeed playing the game of baseball.

The reason the HT coach is employing the tactics he did is to EXTEND the game. He was not playing the game of baseball. In fact IMO it is the coach who is "cheating"

When there's only 3 minutes left on the clock and the team is employing shenanigans then it's time to go home because if the HT played the game the way they should in the first place the game would have indeed ended after 6.

Pete Booth

Okay. Let's say you're absolutely right about your reasons. The question is will you be honest when you call the game and cite these reasons, or will you lie and say time has run out?

[PeteBooth]

[QUOTE][QUOTE=GarthB]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

2 answers.

1. On the field I would not cite any reason but what do as Rich mentioned and simply say Time limit reached - game Over. In the technical sense yes I would lie but we are talking about 3 minutes in a meaningless game in which shenanigans took place. After all it was the HT coach who wanted for some ukknown reason to play an extra inning.


BTW I have started an inning with only 3 minutes left but that was because the teams were hustling and playing the game of baseball. In the OP this was not the case.


2. If the coach got Po'd over my decision and called my assignor, I would tell my assignor what the deal was and knowing my assignor the way I do he would have no problem in what I did.

I am surpised at the responses in this OP in that posters seem to actually condone what this coach did and have no problem with it.

Pete Booth

[MD Longhorn]

[QUOTE-PeteBooth]The object of the game of baseball is to try and score more runs than your opponent not to Give them outs.[/QUOTE]So ... it's the object of the game for him to try to win... but if he chooses this particular tactic to get there, you're going to cheat against him? It's not our jobs to decide which methods we will allow coaches to use to try to win. Obviously for some reason he felt that ending this particular inning and getting a fresh start was his best shot. Regarding "giving them outs", isn't a sac bunt or sac fly the same thing - giving up an out to give the team a better chance to win? You going to end the game early if someone does that too?

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

1. On the field I would not cite any reason but what do as Rich mentioned and simply say Time limit reached - game Over. In the technical sense yes I would lie but we are talking about 3 minutes in a meaningless game in which shenanigans took place. After all it was the HT coach who wanted for some ukknown reason to play an extra inning.

So now it's your duty to determine that this particular game is meaningless? Where does this end? You would lie because you don't like the particular tactic this coach chose to try to win. This isn't the first time I've said this, but I want guys like you nowhere near fields I'm responsible for filling with umpires. This attitude SUCKS.

"In the technical sense, I would lie." You are CHEATING.

If the rulesmakers wanted this particular tactic outlawed, it would be outlawed. Don't make up rules to fit your own sense of fair play.

[PeteBooth]

Regarding "giving them outs", isn't a sac bunt or sac fly the same thing - giving up an out to give the team a better chance to win? You going to end the game early if someone does that too?

You are comparing Apples / Oranges

A sac bunt / Sac Fly is PART of the GAME. It means that the team IS Trying to score which is entirely different than what is happening in this thread.

This isn't the first time I've said this, but I want guys like you nowhere near fields I'm responsible for filling with umpires. This attitude SUCKS.

Feeling is mutual because if you condone what this manger did then I wouldn't work for you along with many umpires I know. I already mentioned that if the game dictated it I do not have a problem being out there "all day" but that is not the case in this thread.

Pete Booth

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

You are comparing Apples / Oranges

A sac bunt / Sac Fly is PART of the GAME. It means that the team IS Trying to score which is entirely different than what is happening in this thread.



Feeling is mutual because if you condone what this manger did then I wouldn't work for you along with many umpires I know. I already mentioned that if the game dictated it I do not have a problem being out there "all day" but that is not the case in this thread.

Pete Booth

You make a lot of assumptions.

Find any place where I say I condone this manager's actions. In fact, while I can understand giving up a 3rd out to get into another inning when you're down by more than a couple of runs, especially if you have your better hitters coming soon... but I think it was probably bad managing to give up TWO outs, especially with R2 and R3 already.

However, my personal views about the stupidity of his strategy are irrelevant. We are there to officiate the game, not make judgement on tactics. While I think this manager's actions might be stupid, or even contrary to the intent of the game ... THAT'S NOT MY CALL, nor is it yours.

You are simply cheating to penalize a LEGAL tactic that you don't like.

My point, repeatedly made, and repeatedly missed by you, is that this tactic is NOT against the rules, and your unilateral decision to rob him of the 3 minutes he gained by taking this tactic is completely against any code of ethics I want my umpires following. There's no better word than cheating.

[PeteBooth]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

My point, repeatedly made, and repeatedly missed by you, is that this tactic is NOT against the rules.

OBR 4.15(b) - Employs tactics palpably designed to DELAY or shorten the game

From the OP

Runners on 2nd and 3rd, one out. After the count goes 3 balls and no strikes on the batter, with 3 minutes left, the coach calls time out to talk to the batter. I put the ball back into play and he sends the runner from third with no attempt to try to score and then he sends the runner from second to get him tagged out. He says that now we have time to start another inning.

Let's see we have R2/R3 one out and a count of 3-0 on B1

The manager calls Time and then sends r3/R3 to PURPOSELY get called out.

Why did the manger do this?

Was it to win the game - Doubt it

With R2/R3 and 3-0 on B1 there is a VERY GOOD Chance that B1 would have walked and the 3 minutes most likely would have ended with the next batter's at bat that's why the manager did what he did.

IMO, this is a classic case of a manager employing tactics to DELAY the game.

If the HT truly wanted to win the game what better chance then to have the bases juiced and only 1 out. For some strange reason the HT coach wanted to play an extra inning. Perhaps he wanted to try so and So on the mound etc. It surely was not to try and win a game.

As mentioned it is the Coach who was "cheating" by not playing the inning the way it should have been played and therefore, time would have run out anyway.

Let me put it another way. Let's say a particular league has a 10 run rule after 5 innings.

95 degree heat, Bottom 5 HT is winning by 9 runs 2 outs and R3. B1 hits a rope into the gap, the manager tells R3 to stay put. What is your next move?

Answer: That's a balk have a nice day gentlemen

Pete Booth

[bluezebra]

The 13 year old team third manager was ejected.

How many managers did this team have? I thought there was only ONE per team.

Bob

[GarthB]

[QUOTE=PeteBooth]

OBR 4.15(b) - Employs tactics palpably designed to DELAY or shorten the game

From the OP

Let's see we have R2/R3 one out and a count of 3-0 on B1

The manager calls Time and then sends r3/R3 to PURPOSELY get called out.

Why did the manger do this?

Was it to win the game - Doubt it

Pete Booth

Most likely he did this to have another full inning to try to win the game or get kids in the game or whatever. It is not a delaying tactic and as bush as it, (and it is bush), it is not illegal.


[QUOTE=PeteBooth]

In the technical sense yes I would lie

The most important thing I bring to a field in my credibility. I do not lie to coaches.

If you have the balls to end the game because of this, you should have the balls to tell the truth.

[MD Longhorn]

[QUOTE=PeteBooth]

Why did the manger do this?

Was it to win the game - Doubt it

I have to ask why you think this. I'm proceeding from the assumption that the reason he did this was that for SOME reason (not knowing who is batting next, whether the other team's current pitcher would have to be removed for some reason, etc) he DID think that this move helped his team win. I may disagree ... but I have to assume that his move came with that reason in mind. I don't understand why you think otherwise.

With R2/R3 and 3-0 on B1 there is a VERY GOOD Chance that B1 would have walked and the 3 minutes most likely would have ended with the next batter's at bat that's why the manager did what he did.

Now you've abandoned all sense. With 1 out, why would the inning end with his at bat? If it's a drop-dead time limit, and the game DOES end during this kid's at bat ... then beginning another inning is pointless anyway, so that can't be it. The logic here sounds like you DO think he was employing this tactic to give himself a better chance to win... Which is it?

IMO, this is a classic case of a manager employing tactics to DELAY the game.

As much as you want it to be, delay and hasten are not synonyms. Delaying the game is a completely opposite thing ... slowing things down to cause time to run off PREVENTING an extra inning from being played. If the rulesmakers wanted hastening an inning to be included in this rule, they could have and would have. They didn't. this move is not illegal, even if it's bush league.

As mentioned it is the Coach who was "cheating" by not playing the inning the way it should have been played and therefore, time would have run out anyway.

It's not cheating if his tactic is legal.

Let me put it another way. Let's say a particular league has a 10 run rule after 5 innings.

95 degree heat, Bottom 5 HT is winning by 9 runs 2 outs and R3. B1 hits a rope into the gap, the manager tells R3 to stay put. What is your next move?

Answer: That's a balk have a nice day gentlemen

Pete Booth

Holy crap. Bad enough you admit you'd cheat by misreading your watch. Now you're inventing things in play just to get home earlier. Please keep you're sorry cheating backside off the field. The game's not about getting your lazy butt home early - it's about making accurate rulings about what you see in the game. Not inventing things. I'm completely flabbergasted that you purport to be an umpire. Tell TimD I said hi.

[UmpLarryJohnson]

WOW is mr PeteBooth a rat in his spare time? sure reads like it!!

his attitude is the same as outlawing the skunk play cause "I dont like it, thats all". Bush does NOT always mean ILLEGAL. Your making up rules to GO HOME EARLY, lying as you go. pitiful. you should RETURN your gamefee.

Leave the LYING to RATS. oh waitaminute......

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Holy crap. Bad enough you admit you'd cheat by misreading your watch....

At least he's honest about his dishonesty. Wait, how do we know he's telling the truth about this?

[edhern]

Thanks for the spirited discussion. Since I started the thread and based on the discussion, here are my final thoughts.

Regarding the ejection:
After the play, the manager anounces out loud something to the effect of "now we have time for another inning." To me that is showing up the umpire and throwing in my face what he did. This is an ejection in my mind and I bet the majority of those out there would have tossed the manager.

Time limit:
It is no inning can start after, the inning goes to completion, not a drop dead time. He has the opportunity to score and win the game. If the batter hit the next pitch into a double play, the next inning starts. Don't say I was looking to get out of there early. In fact, the game afterwards received one start time and really started three minutes later. We gave them three minutes and at 12:27 am (yes, a.m.) we started a new inning without sticking to the original time limit and finished the game at 12:55 a.m. (don't ask about the scheduling). So there was a perfect time to end the game by rule at 12:27 and we didn't.

Now interpreting the rule:
The only thing that is clear is that there is no rule. I will stand by my interpretation and feel I can make a reasonable argument for what I did. A reasonable argument. Only my association can make a determination on how to deal with what happened. Both the President and Umpire-in-Chief did not say what I did was necessarily wrong, but took the politically safe way out regarding their relationship with the account and I took one for the team without asking for an appeal.

My view of the rules as it pertains:
1.02 The objective of each team is to win by scoring more runs than the opponent.
The team was not trying to win by scoring more runs and thus not fulfilling the objective of the game.

4.15 A game may be forfeited to the opposing team when a team:
(b) Employs tactics palpably designed to delay or shorten the game;
Again, in my opinion, he had the opportunity to win the game if he played on. The manager chose to deliberately delay the end of the game for whatever purpose went through his mind.

9.01

(c) Each umpire has authority to rule on any point not specifically covered in these rules.
This is clearly not covered in specifically in the rules and this was my interpretation.


9.04 (a) The umpire in chief shall stand behind the catcher. (He usually is called the plate umpire.) His duties shall be to:
(1) Take full charge of, and be responsible for, the proper conduct of the game;

In my opinion, this was not proper conduct of the game.

If this was a court of law it would require case law to decide and there is none because this type of situation with time limits is not covered by MLB rules. There is no resolution only opinions, once again, thanks for yours.

Ed H

[CraigD]

[QUOTE=edhern]
Again, in my opinion, he had the opportunity to win the game if he played on. The manager chose to deliberately delay the end of the game for whatever purpose went through his mind.
[/QUOTE=edhern]

Ed,

What do you think he was thinking? Why did he want to play another inning? Do you think he was trying to lose the game?

[MD Longhorn]

I'm not jumping down your throat like I did Pete - you are asking for input, and not sure whether what you did was right ... and at least are not advocating blatantly making up rules to curtail something you just don't like.

But...

Originally Posted by edhern

After the play, the manager anounces out loud something to the effect of "now we have time for another inning." To me that is showing up the umpire and throwing in my face what he did. This is an ejection in my mind and I bet the majority of those out there would have tossed the manager.

Profane, prolonged, or personal. If this is an ejection by itself, I suggest getting thicker skin. If this comment was after some sort of related argument, and it was obvious he was trying to show you up, fine, toss him. By itself, this comment doesn't sound ejectionable.

Time limit:
It is no inning can start after, the inning goes to completion, not a drop dead time. He has the opportunity to score and win the game. If the batter hit the next pitch into a double play, the next inning starts. Don't say I was looking to get out of there early.

I didn't. I said Pete was. I don't think this was your motivation at all. I think your motivation was that you thought he was breaking a rule, and you were enforcing that rule. My only response to this is that it was not, in fact, breaking a rule, and you overstepped your authority inadvertently.

In fact, the game afterwards received one start time and really started three minutes later. We gave them three minutes and at 12:27 am (yes, a.m.) we started a new inning without sticking to the original time limit and finished the game at 12:55 a.m. (don't ask about the scheduling). So there was a perfect time to end the game by rule at 12:27 and we didn't.

At the risk of sounding like I'm just trying to be contrary to everything ... this is just as bad. The game ends when the game ends. Don't cut it short, and don't "give them another inning". Had the lead changed hands in that "extra inning", your decision to go outside the time limit could have cheated one team.

Now interpreting the rule:
The only thing that is clear is that there is no rule. I will stand by my interpretation and feel I can make a reasonable argument for what I did. A reasonable argument. Only my association can make a determination on how to deal with what happened. Both the President and Umpire-in-Chief did not say what I did was necessarily wrong, but took the politically safe way out regarding their relationship with the account and I took one for the team without asking for an appeal.

Fair enough. Just know for the future that there is no rule against getting out on purpose to try to get a new inning in in a time limit game. There IS a rule against delaying, but this is the opposite.

The below sections seem to be weak justifications for what you did, in retrospect. But I'll hit each one.

1.02 The objective of each team is to win by scoring more runs than the opponent.
The team was not trying to win by scoring more runs and thus not fulfilling the objective of the game.

The objective is not a rule per se as much as a definition. There's no penalty for violating a definition.

4.15 A game may be forfeited to the opposing team when a team:
(b) Employs tactics palpably designed to delay or shorten the game;
Again, in my opinion, he had the opportunity to win the game if he played on. The manager chose to deliberately delay the end of the game for whatever purpose went through his mind.

I don't know how it's an opinion to reverse the definition of "delay" or "shorten". This rule applies to situations exactly opposite from the one you were confronted with. Employing a tactic that a manager thinks will help him win by getting to another inning, for whatever reason, is not illegal.

9.01

(c) Each umpire has authority to rule on any point not specifically covered in these rules.
This is clearly not covered in specifically in the rules and this was my interpretation.

This has been covered here before... but if you have to resort to 9.01c, you are probably misinterpreting something. If a hangglider lands on your field ... an earthquake disrupts play ... a fence falls into the field... etc - go get your 9.01c. MOST things that can be anticipated are in the rulebook ... and a coach letting his kids get out so he can play another inning has SURELY been anticipated.

9.04 (a) The umpire in chief shall stand behind the catcher. (He usually is called the plate umpire.) His duties shall be to:
(1) Take full charge of, and be responsible for, the proper conduct of the game;

In my opinion, this was not proper conduct of the game.

So eject. Conduct is one thing. Tactics is completely different, and covered elsewhere.

If this was a court of law it would require case law to decide and there is none because this type of situation with time limits is not covered by MLB rules. There is no resolution only opinions, once again, thanks for yours.

This is not the first time this has ever happened. Trust us (not just me), a wealth of experience here has told you that what this manager did is not illegal. Folks that have faced this. Folks that have been in rooms when rule changes are discussed. Trust me - it's not illegal.