When is a conference charged?

[skinner51]

A game I was at, the defense called time, came out and made a pitching change. No charged conference for changing the pitcher. The coach then walked over to the dugout, then turned and went out to second base to confer with his infielders. As the coach crossed back into foul territory, the umpire informed the coach that because he had crossed the foul line in going to the dugout after the pitching change, then turned and went back out to the field to talk with his defense, he would be charged with a conference. The coach replied that it was a dead ball situation while the pitcher was warming up and that he is allowed to come back onto the field during a dead ball situation.

The umpire stood by his guns and charged the coach with a conference. Was that the right call??

[DG]

Originally Posted by skinner51

A game I was at, the defense called time, came out and made a pitching change. No charged conference for changing the pitcher. The coach then walked over to the dugout, then turned and went out to second base to confer with his infielders. As the coach crossed back into foul territory, the umpire informed the coach that because he had crossed the foul line in going to the dugout after the pitching change, then turned and went back out to the field to talk with his defense, he would be charged with a conference. The coach replied that it was a dead ball situation while the pitcher was warming up and that he is allowed to come back onto the field during a dead ball situation.

The umpire stood by his guns and charged the coach with a conference. Was that the right call??

Yes, by rule (3-4-3) and by case book (3.4.3). Crossing the foul line ends the conference.

I would have informed him he was taking another conference before he crossed the line again to go to F4 so he can decide if he really wanted to do this.

[Dave Reed]

IMO, charging a conference in this situation is being OOO. In fact the case play 3.4.3 specifically refers to a coach who did not replace the pitcher returning "to the mound" . The point of this rule is to avoid delaying the game, and in the OP situation it isn't (so far) being delayed, because the new pitcher is warming up.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by skinner51

The coach replied that it was a dead ball situation while the pitcher was warming up and that he is allowed to come back onto the field during a dead ball situation.

So, is he allowed a free trip after a foul ball? How about when a batter gets hit by pitch? Runner's interference? Heck, those are all dead ball situations.

If he got back to the dugout and then went out again....charge him. Nothing OOO about it.

[archangel]

Originally Posted by skinner51

The coach replied that it was a dead ball situation while the pitcher was warming up and that he is allowed to come back onto the field during a dead ball situation.

The coach was wrong about the above, but I agree with Dave on the OOO. Those other examples of dead ball situations are different and the game could be delayed.
What if, while near the mound, the coach sees that the new pitcher has an illegal glove, and while F1 warms up, the coach walks to the dugout and grabs a different glove. I cant believe a charged conf is warranted.....

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by archangel

What if, while near the mound, the coach sees that the new pitcher has an illegal glove, and while F1 warms up, the coach walks to the dugout and grabs a different glove. I cant believe a charged conf is warranted.....

Is that what happened? Gee, my mistake.

I thought the OP said he concluded his visit as indicated by entering the dugout and then went back on the field to conference with his defense.

I better check my reading glasses.

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by archangel

The coach was wrong about the above, but I agree with Dave on the OOO. Those other examples of dead ball situations are different and the game could be delayed.
What if, while near the mound, the coach sees that the new pitcher has an illegal glove, and while F1 warms up, the coach walks to the dugout and grabs a different glove. I cant believe a charged conf is warranted.....

You guys can "what if" a thread to death! Sooner or later, "what if'ing" a situation will reverse the consequences.

In the original post, the coach crossed the foul line (FED) there-by ending the visit. He cannot return to the field on a free ride - period No "what-if's" The umpire was correct in charging a visit in this case.

Furthermore, had this been OBR, when the coach leaves the dirt of the mound, he has to keep walking to the dugout. If he tries to return, he gets warned that he will be ejected and if he ignores the warning, he's done.

[TwoBits]

I would say this is definitley a bit of OOO, but our OOO is also wrong with his interpretation.

FED 3-1-2: If a pitcher is replaced while his team is on defense, the substitute pitcher shall pitch to the batter then at bat or any substitute for that batter until such batter is put out or reaches base or until a third out is made. To ensure that the requirements of this article be fulfilled, the umpire will deny any coach-defensive player conference that will violate the rule.

A conference should not have been charged. Using the correct interpretation, our OOO should have disallowed the coach back onto the field during warmups.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by TwoBits

I would say this is definitley a bit of OOO, but our OOO is also wrong with his interpretation.

FED 3-1-2: If a pitcher is replaced while his team is on defense, the substitute pitcher shall pitch to the batter then at bat or any substitute for that batter until such batter is put out or reaches base or until a third out is made. To ensure that the requirements of this article be fulfilled, the umpire will deny any coach-defensive player conference that will violate the rule.

A conference should not have been charged. Using the correct interpretation, our OOO should have disallowed the coach back onto the field during warmups.

Wrong interpretation. That rule is specifically designed to prevent a coach from replacing, or causing to be replaced, a pitcher prior to his fulfilling the requirements.

Example: Coach has used all three freebies and has put in a new pitcher. Offense counters with a pinch batter. Def. HC decided he wants a different pitcher and tries to get one by going for another trip thinking the umpire will make him pull his pitcher.

In the OP situation, it is not OOO to charge a coach trying to gain an unfair advantage.

[TwoBits]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Wrong interpretation. That rule is specifically designed to prevent a coach from replacing, or causing to be replaced, a pitcher prior to his fulfilling the requirements.

Example: Coach has used all three freebies and has put in a new pitcher. Offense counters with a pinch batter. Def. HC decided he wants a different pitcher and tries to get one by going for another trip thinking the umpire will make him pull his pitcher.

In the OP situation, it is not OOO to charge a coach trying to gain an unfair advantage.

I disagree. It is in black and white: You cannot allow a conference to any defensive player after a pitching change until the pitcher has fulfilled his requirements.

The OOO, in "sticking with his guns" should have stopped the coach and informed him that he was not allowed back onto the field until the pitcher's requirements had been fulfilled.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by TwoBits

I disagree. It is in black and white: You cannot allow a conference to any defensive player after a pitching change until the pitcher has fulfilled his requirements.

A black and white umpire, eh?

You may disagree all you want, but the intent of the rule is as I stated. Bolding "any defensive player" doesn't matter, the effect is the same. The rule is in place to prevent a coach from trying to "force himself" to replace a pitcher who has not fulfilled his requirement.

This is tactic used by seasoned coaches on umpires who do not understand the intent of the rule.

[TwoBits]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

A black and white umpire, eh?

You may disagree all you want, but the intent of the rule is as I stated. Bolding "any defensive player" doesn't matter, the effect is the same. The rule is in place to prevent a coach from trying to "force himself" to replace a pitcher who has not fulfilled his requirement.

This is tactic used by seasoned coaches on umpires who do not understand the intent of the rule.

So you agree with the OOO that a conference should be charged?

[cc6]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

You guys can "what if" a thread to death! Sooner or later, "what if'ing" a situation will reverse the consequences.

In the original post, the coach crossed the foul line (FED) there-by ending the visit. He cannot return to the field on a free ride - period No "what-if's" The umpire was correct in charging a visit in this case.

Furthermore, had this been OBR, when the coach leaves the dirt of the mound, he has to keep walking to the dugout. If he tries to return, he gets warned that he will be ejected and if he ignores the warning, he's done.

Here is an ambiguity in the OBR rules. A mound visit starts when the manager crosses the foul line. If a manager leaves the dirt circle but doesn't cross the foul line, he can't satisfy the requirement for starting a mound visit. So we have to assume that the act of leaving the dirt circle overrides the significance of crossing the foul line. The rules could do a better job of explaining mound visits in general.

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by cc6

Here is an ambiguity in the OBR rules. A mound visit starts when the manager crosses the foul line. If a manager leaves the dirt circle but doesn't cross the foul line, he can't satisfy the requirement for starting a mound visit. So we have to assume that the act of leaving the dirt circle overrides the significance of crossing the foul line. The rules could do a better job of explaining mound visits in general.

You seem to be confused about the two rules.

FED - the conference ends when the coach leaves the mound and crosses the foul line (going back to the dugout). The coach can leave the mound, head to the foul line, turn and meet with F3, just as long as he does not cross the foul line.

OBR - the visit ends the moment the manager's feet touch the infield grass (leaves the dirt of the mound). He cannot meet with anyone else once he leaves the dirt of the mound for any reason. He must continue into the dugout. The foul line does not come into play for ending the visit as it does in FED.

[jkumpire]

Originally Posted by TwoBits

I would say this is definitley a bit of OOO, but our OOO is also wrong with his interpretation.

FED 3-1-2: If a pitcher is replaced while his team is on defense, the substitute pitcher shall pitch to the batter then at bat or any substitute for that batter until such batter is put out or reaches base or until a third out is made. To ensure that the requirements of this article be fulfilled, the umpire will deny any coach-defensive player conference that will violate the rule.

A conference should not have been charged. Using the correct interpretation, our OOO should have disallowed the coach back onto the field during warmups.

So my good man,

How long do you allow the defense to freeze the offense in the middle of a rally by allowing free conferences with his infielders? If you don't charge him a conference, he can talk all day or as many times as he wants to people if he makes a pitching change. Makes no sense to me.

By the bye, you are misreading the rule, IMO. If the defense has conferences left, then talking to another defense player is not illegal. But it is going to cost him a conference to do so. So it is not OOO to charge him with a conference. It is not illegal for him to go back to the field after he crosses the foul line if he has conferences left to use. Now, if there was an equipment problem, or a possible injury, and the HC needs to go back out, and he tells me why he is going back out, okay, no conference as long as no coaching is done.

In FED ball, if you have conferences, you can meet.