Federation ambiguity w/ "Distraction"

[johnnyg08]

I've had problems with this part of the rule for a long time, esp when referring to the pitcher. Why don't they simply make the rule something that removes the "if deemed to be a distraction." I've found myself saving everybody the headaches and simply telling F2 to go out and tell his pitcher to x,y,z because the other team will say something anyway. When really what I'd like to tell the offense is to get up there and hit the ball as opposed to whining that part of the pitcher's batting glove is sticking out of his pocket.

To those of you who work FED ball, have you ever told a coach..."no, I don't think it's distracting, you'll have to deal with it."

http://www.nfhs.org/web/2009/02/2009...s_interpr.aspx

Specifically the first few dealing with the "white" I can understand the rule portion of the white not extending below the elbow...but I just dislike administering the "distraction" portions of the rule.

Your thoughts and advice:

[Welpe]

I think a simple "Skip, in my judgment it is not distracting" will suffice.

[johnnyg08]

Easier said than actually done on the field, don't you think? I guess my point is why fight the battle? I'm not disagreeing with you...after all, I asked for the advice...but from a game management standpoint, if you know coach is going to come out anyway...you now are calling time, going to talk to coach, then telling him that "it's not distracting when he says it is" now, in his player's minds...they're convinced that they're all distracted so he tells his on deck hitter to ask the umpire to x,y,z because he's distracted.

I guess I just don't think it's that easy. Esp here in MN where coaches are rating you as part of the State tournament selection process.

[MrUmpire]

One difference is that if you enforce it without being asked, you're an OOO in the eyes of the other coaches; whereas, when you enforce it at the the request of a coach, the coach takes the heat from his brethern.

That said, I tend to agree Welpe and decline the invitation to be part of the complaining coach's game strategy as much as possible.

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

you enforce it at the the request of a coach, the coach takes the heat from his brethern.

That's an interesting take. Is keeping the game moving on something inevitable considered OOO? I guess I don't really care what the coaches think of each other when if the shoe was on the other foot, they'd probably do the exact same thing?

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

That's an interesting take. Is keeping the game moving on something inevitable considered OOO?

That's not what I meant to suggest. Sorry if I wasn't clear. In this area, taking it upon one's self to enforce BS trivial "distractions" is considered OOO by many in both the umpiring and coaching ends of the business.

[johnnyg08]

Fair points...I certainly agree...I guess in my area I have learned that I can't be too proud to simplly prevent the ticky-tack issue of even coming up because I don't want to get into pi$$ing contest w/ a coach over what is or isn't considered distracting

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Welpe

I think a simple "Skip, in my judgment it is not distracting" will suffice.

It does not get much more complicated than that.

Peace

[Welpe]

I guess I fail to see where the pi$$ing match comes in. Coach comes out, states that a batting glove in the pitcher's back pocket is distracting, I tell him "Not in my judgment." The conversation is over at this point and I am going back to my position. No further discussion is necessary and we're going to play ball. If he wants to be petty about it and belabor the point, he can go sit down or enjoy an early shower.

A smart coach will get the message and if he wants to pick a fight over something trivial such as this, he probably isn't a very good coach anyways.

Now if you have a pitcher doing an Al Jolson impression with eyeblack or something equally as ridiculous...that is a different story and deserves to be addressed.

[johnnyg08]

I guess I can certainly give it a try. How do you get around the "power trip" rebuttle? In an effort to not sound like I'm trying to argue, I'm trying to think through the things that they'll say to me when I say...'it's not a distraction, let's play ball' I have no problem being assertive about things, but some battles are worth fighting, some aren't. I guess I'll find out this spring if it was worth it or not.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

I've had problems with this part of the rule for a long time, esp when referring to the pitcher. Why don't they simply make the rule something that removes the "if deemed to be a distraction."

Because there's no possible way to list all the items / color combinations / locations that might be distracting.

Sometimes you just need to umpire.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Welpe

I guess I fail to see where the pi$$ing match comes in. Coach comes out, states that a batting glove in the pitcher's back pocket is distracting, I tell him "Not in my judgment." The conversation is over at this point and I am going back to my position. No further discussion is necessary and we're going to play ball. If he wants to be petty about it and belabor the point, he can go sit down or enjoy an early shower.

A smart coach will get the message and if he wants to pick a fight over something trivial such as this, he probably isn't a very good coach anyways.

Now if you have a pitcher doing an Al Jolson impression with eyeblack or something equally as ridiculous...that is a different story and deserves to be addressed.

I have said this before and I will say this again. If you have a certain presence on the field, you will not have to worry about many pissing matches in the first place. If you are constantly having coaches challenge your positions, it might be how you are being precieved and that has a lot to do with how many times you have to eject coaches in many cases.

Peace

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I have said this before and I will say this again. If you have a certain presence on the field, you will not have to worry about many pissing matches in the first place. If you are constantly having coaches challenge your positions, it might be how you are being precieved and that has a lot to do with how many times you have to eject coaches in many cases.

Peace

I completely agree.

[MajorDave]

Originally Posted by Welpe

.....A smart coach will get the message and if he wants to pick a fight over something trivial such as this, he probably isn't a very good coach anyways.

An observation of mine over the years is that the teams that aren't very good (read: suck) usually have coaches that aren't very good (read: suck).

They have a way of blaming all the poor play and coaching by their players and themselves on the umpires. Sometimes I let myself get caught up in all the sorry, poorly played and coached baseball and let my game drop to their level. I hate it when that happens.

Examples like Welpe's and others' are usually what these guys resort to-asking us to call stupid stuff and whining about calls.

Makes for a very long day/night indeed..... Make 'em ask and then, if and only if, you deem their complaint has merit and action is warranted make the correction or make the call. Don't be afraid to tell them to get their butt back in the dugout. I hope some of these sorry coaches scratch me. I hate poorly played baseball with whining coaches.

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I have said this before and I will say this again. If you have a certain presence on the field, you will not have to worry about many pissing matches in the first place. If you are constantly having coaches challenge your positions, it might be how you are being precieved and that has a lot to do with how many times you have to eject coaches in many cases.

Peace

I wouldn't say constantly by any means, not even seldom...but the crappy coach's rating is worth just as much as the great coach who "gets" how the game is played. I haven't had to eject, nor do I think this would ever escalate to a situation where a coach would eject himself, he'll just take it out on me in my rating and in MN, where rating does matter whether I like it or not, I feel like I need to consider that in how I approach things.

Bob J. I understand that they can never make a rule for every color combination but the rules specifically deal with "white issues"...my argument would be that if those who argue the ticky-tack would worry more about hitting than the hint of white somewhere, they'd be better off, but you can't get in that discussion on the field.

Thanks for offering your thoughts on this...keep 'em coming