NFHS Rules Change (Proposal)

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by Tim C

PROPOSED CHANGE:

Remove the words "equipment and"....

I take it you mean the term "and loose equipment", as the term "equipment and" does not appear in the quoted rule.

To me, "...takes his glove and loose equipment to the bench at the end of his term in the field" is referring to between half-innings and applies to an action once the game has started.

I've never run across this being a problem before the game even starts, and certainly never had a case where a coach made his players remove their loose gear from the field before a game started, just to comply with rule 10-2-3a!

Is this really causing a problem for folks out there- one big enough or frequent enough to warrant a rule change?

[UmpJM]

Bretman,

I'm not sure what you're looking at, but the rule Tim cited appears in the (2008) book exactly as he quoted it and there ain't no "loose" anywhere to be seen in the vicinity.

While "loose equipment" is certainly addressed elsewhere in the text of the rules(1-3-7 comes most prominently to my mind), it has NOTHING to do with the change Tim is suggesting.

JM

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by BretMan

I take it you mean the term "and loose equipment", as the term "equipment and" does not appear in the quoted rule.

Rule 10 Section 2 Umpire-In-Chief

Article 3. . . His duties include those listed in Rules 10-2-1,2 and the following:

a. Inspect equipment and condition of field, receive batting order of both teams, announce special ground rules and formulate such if the two teams cannot agree, designate official scorer (9-2-2) and see that each player takes his glove and loose equipment to the bench at the end of his term in the field.

[BretMan]

Okay, that term is in the first part of the rule- my bad. But I took it, from the "rationale" offered, that the propsed rule change is to prevent players from removing equipment from the field prior to the game, to "eliminate the need for umpires to enter the teams dugouts to inspect equipment prior to a contest".

But now I get it- somebody wants to remove the pre-game equipment inspection entirely from our responsibilities.

Why not just say that!

JM: I might have misinterpreted the intent of the proposal, but I didn't add words that aren't even there. The word "loose" is definitely there. It is the 38th word in the sentence, and being within the same sentence seems to qualify as being "in the vicinity".

[tjones1]

Bret,

It was put in that format because that's how the NFHS wants proposals to be submitted.