A Two-fer

Interested Ump · #1 (**permalink**) Sat Nov 03, 2007, 10:25pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If you couldn't eject during playing action, hen they wouldn't have the statement in the rules about the ejection not becoming effective until the end of playing action.

Eject when the action occurs.

Bob, what's the hurry? What is gained by interfering with play by ejecting while the ball is live if the player is allowed to continue in the play?

It is an association wide rule of ours. The only reason we can see to eject prior to the end of the play is that it satisfies the official's need to express his anger, or to make a bravado display of sort. IOW, it doesn't serve the game, the officials or the teams any value.

SanDiegoSteve · #2 (**permalink**) Sat Nov 03, 2007, 10:42pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Interested Ump

It is an association wide rule of ours.

Didn't you make the rules? You are the boss there, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Interested Ump

The only reason we can see to eject prior to the end of the play is that it satisfies the official's need to express his anger, or to make a bravado display of sort. IOW, it doesn't serve the game, the officials or the teams any value.

That is a load of bovine manure.

DG · #3 (**permalink**) Sun Nov 04, 2007, 09:13pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Didn't you make the rules? You are the boss there, right?

That is a load of bovine manure.

Another one for "the list".

SanDiegoSteve · #4 (**permalink**) Sun Nov 04, 2007, 09:24pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by DG

Another one for "the list".

Heh heh, I peek at his posts too. I can't hep maself. I been hyp-mo-tized!

fitump56 · #5 (**permalink**) Mon Nov 05, 2007, 05:58am

Quote:

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Didn't you make the rules? You are the boss there, right?

All association rules are subject to vote unless thay are contractual.

bob jenkins · #6 (**permalink**) Sun Nov 04, 2007, 03:29pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Interested Ump

Bob, what's the hurry? What is gained by interfering with play by ejecting while the ball is live if the player is allowed to continue in the play?

there's no "hurry", but ejecting when the act occurs can help prevent further ejections (from others getting involved) and help stop the claim that you were "talked into it" by the team not committing the act.

Quote:

It is an association wide rule of ours. The only reason we can see to eject prior to the end of the play is that it satisfies the official's need to express his anger, or to make a bravado display of sort. IOW, it doesn't serve the game, the officials or the teams any value.

Well, good for your association. But, that's not the norm, and I haven't seen the need for such a rule.

fitump56 · #7 (**permalink**) Mon Nov 05, 2007, 05:54am

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

there's no "hurry", but ejecting when the act occurs can help prevent further ejections (from others getting involved) and help stop the claim that you were "talked into it" by the team not committing the act.

Like this?

"Blues, Coach X and his team, they talked you into that ejection.!"
"Coach Z, I ejected your player for ."
"Why did you wait so long then?'
"I didn't wait any longer than was required to finish the play."
"What?, Why wait?"
Coach, if I eject while the ball is live, I could influence play. Simple as that."

Point being, the ejected player is no less guilty, no less ejected whether you potentialy disrupt play withj a live ball ejection or you wait until there is no chance you are going to disrutp play.

UMP25 · #8 (**permalink**) Mon Nov 05, 2007, 05:17pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by fitump56

Coach, if I eject while the ball is live, I could influence play. Simple as that."

Huh? You can't influence a play when you eject someone while the ball's live or a play's going on. I've done it, and never has a problem resulted. There have been a few times where a fielder or runner was too stupid to keep arguing while I ignored them to continue my job during the play, but that's not my fault; they're the stupid ones.

Ejecting someone in the middle of a play is not as uncommon as one may think, and it is something permissible under the rules.

SanDiegoSteve · #9 (**permalink**) Mon Nov 05, 2007, 09:40pm

I personally never had any problem whatsoever ejecting participants during live action. I also never missed any of the action nor did I interrupt any potential defensive or offensive plays in the process.

I found it quite easy to holler "You're gone!" without removing my focus from the play at hand. I would suggest if anyone has a problem doing this during a live ball that that person is not much of an umpire.

Any umpire worth his hot dog and a Coke should be able to handle ejecting while the play is still proceeding.

Tim C · #10 (**permalink**) Tue Nov 06, 2007, 09:14am

I am with Rich . . . many times I have allowed a coach to enter the field as the BR was walking towards first. Time is out at that time.

And I have ejected during a play and just allowed the play to continue and completed the ejection at plays end.

These are two very simple and common occurances.

Regards,

UmpLarryJohnson · #11 (**permalink**) Tue Nov 06, 2007, 09:54am

youll also note umpires swapping baseballs thathit the dirt w catchers while a batter--runner is going to first on a walk and time is clearly "Called" for that too.

UMP25 · #12 (**permalink**) Tue Nov 06, 2007, 09:58am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim C

I am with Rich . . . many times I have allowed a coach to enter the field as the BR was walking towards first. Time is out at that time.

And I have ejected during a play and just allowed the play to continue and completed the ejection at plays end.

These are two very simple and common occurances.

Regards,

Indeed, which is why I'm surprised by the opposition to it.

insatty · #13 (**permalink**) Tue Nov 06, 2007, 11:17am

The pitch that preceeded F1's outburst was a strike. The bad call allowed a run to score. I would have been "pissed" too. But F1 should have been ejected. Both umpires in these videos need a few clinics and aren't ready for the level of youth ball they're working.

UMP25 · #14 (**permalink**) Tue Nov 06, 2007, 11:27am

This happened in a D-III NCAA game in spring 2006:

I'm on the bases with nobody on and the score tied between two archrivals. The visiting team's batter raps a long fly down the right field line that ends up going out for a dinger. Well, as I turned to take the ball and the call, I hear behind me something erupt--a bunch of abnormal screaming and trash talking. As I finished my duties and have turned back toward the field to go back to my "A" position, I find out that the batter, after smacking the dinger, waited at home plate and flipped his bat at the pitcher, with the bat landing near the mound. The batter apparently had also said something to the pitcher while doing this. My partner working the plate, who was an MiLB ump working some spring ball for me, immediately tossed the batter.

Next, the home team's head coach comes to my partner trying to convince him that the home run doesn't count because the guy was ejected. The head coach doesn't win his argument, so he comes to me saying, "Randy, you're the crew chief. You've got to do something." I replied, "We did. The guy was ejected and we'll forward the report to your A.D. and the conference commissioner." "But he was ejected. You can't count the home run!" he maintains. "Oh? Then what would you like me to do with his at-bat? Create an out? Forget he ever existed? Sorry, Brian, but by rule, the home run counts and the ejection takes effect after he scores."

Brian walked away thoroughly confused but none too happy.

GarthB · #15 (**permalink**) Tue Nov 06, 2007, 12:44pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by UMP25

This happened in a D-III NCAA game in spring 2006:

I'm on the bases with nobody on and the score tied between two archrivals. The visiting team's batter raps a long fly down the right field line that ends up going out for a dinger. Well, as I turned to take the ball and the call, I hear behind me something erupt--a bunch of abnormal screaming and trash talking. As I finished my duties and have turned back toward the field to go back to my "A" position, I find out that the batter, after smacking the dinger, waited at home plate and flipped his bat at the pitcher, with the bat landing near the mound. The batter apparently had also said something to the pitcher while doing this. My partner working the plate, who was an MiLB ump working some spring ball for me, immediately tossed the batter.

Next, the home team's head coach comes to my partner trying to convince him that the home run doesn't count because the guy was ejected. The head coach doesn't win his argument, so he comes to me saying, "Randy, you're the crew chief. You've got to do something." I replied, "We did. The guy was ejected and we'll forward the report to your A.D. and the conference commissioner." "But he was ejected. You can't count the home run!" he maintains. "Oh? Then what would you like me to do with his at-bat? Create an out? Forget he ever existed? Sorry, Brian, but by rule, the home run counts and the ejection takes effect after he scores."

Brian walked away thoroughly confused but none too happy.

Prediction:

A misunderstanding, myopic straw grasper will see this as evidence as to why the ejection should have waited for the batter to reach home instead of proper mechanics.