Video posted on the NFHS Discussion Forum.
 

This video was posted in the NFHS Baseball Discussion Forum.

YouTube - Baseball fight!


Let the discussion begin.

MTD, Sr.

Double forfeit.

If the state won't enforce that, then MC on the catcher.

Bob:

I agree with you. In fact it was pretty close to MC by both F2 and the Runner with Runner on the losing end of the contact.

MTD, Sr.

AAh, good old fashion baseball...:D Thanks for bringing back the memories of youth...:D

But Bob's right, double forfeit. The good old days are over.....

It does appear that the runner instigated it, but then the catcher continued it by hovering over his kill. Had no fight occurred, I got both of them ejected. The runner for M/C and then the catcher for his unsportsmanlike conduct. I dont consider a glove sammich (spelled that way on purpose) M/C when the catcher is put in this situation....:D

I've got an immediate ejection on the runner for MC. Ejection on the catcher for his response to the MC.

I thought the umpires did a fine job of restoring order, with the help of a deputy. But I don't see how they allowed this game to continue.

3-3-Q... A coach, player substitute, attendant or other bench personnel shall not leave their positions or bench area for the purpose of fighting or physical confrontation.
PENALTY... The umpire shall eject the offender from the game. (A coach who attempts to prevent a fight or restore order is not in violation of the rule).

If I'm in a game where both benches empty, I don't foresee allowing it to continue.

Agree with Bob. No way would I be sticking around for a sequel

-Josh

It would be easier to look in both dugouts to see who (if anyone) is NOT participating in the fight. They are the only players who are not ejected.

Don't have my book in front of me and it seemed as though this was probably a playoff game (which should not matter), but what rule gives us the right to suspend the game because a fight occurs?

When the going gets tough gentlemen, do we get going?

Are you kidding!!!! Every player that left the bench or their position on the field, even to advance toward the fight should be ejected.
If that was done, neither team would have enough to continue the game.
My take is GAME OVER!

jicecone,

It's actually a combination of rules. 3-3-1q and 4-4-1f work for me.

JM

4-4-1 A game shall be forfeited to the offended team by the umpire when
a team:

f. is unable to provide at least nine players to start the game or cannot provide eight players to finish the game


If either team has less than 8 players after all ejections the game is over.

If three kids from each team go in a fight, I do not think anyone would say anything other than ejections.

These umpires are out of their freaking minds to continue this game. I agree with all that have said double forfeit.

I do not agree with what was said above that the umpires did a fine job of restoring order. There is no order if these kids were allowed to continue playing.

Joe in Missouri

I said I couldn't believe they let the game to continue.

As far as restoring order, I was simply talking about getting the fight stopped. As ugly as this was, it could have been worse if fans had gotten involved or kids had gotten hurt.

I think it's asinine that this game was allowed to continue. It doesn't matter if this was a playoff game or not, I would have stopped everything and let the state association decide what to do.

I don't agree. The umpires did a good job in an ugly situation, the coaches ended up getting order restored.

Baseball does not have the leaving the bench rule like basketball; however, I would have been writing down number of anyone who made contact with another player.

I would hope though that the state association would review, put both schools on probation and if a playoff situation, make certain that players ejected do not play the next game etc.,

For certain, F2 is ejected and runner is because of MC.

I've had a basketball brawl before and it's very ugly, but the game was able to continue without further incident.

Thanks
David

3-3-1q and 3.3.1JJ (especially the part about "once F6 and the on-deck batter LEFT THEIR POSITIONS" (emphasis added) ) would seem to say that baseball does have such a rule.

David,

If we're talking FED, it sure does. 3-3-1q

JM

I'll have to look at those in the book. Thnaks
David

I will check my books when I get home but I suspect that I will not find a rule that specifically says the umpire has authority to end a game because a fight took place or because he feels like it.

Also, ejecting players in order to not have enough and actually having the authority to end the game are two different things. And a good umpire would certainly not resort to this to begin with.

How would you propose handling the high school bench brawl?

In my opinion, I start writing down numbers of the guaranteed ejections and see who's left after that's done. I would continue the game if possible, enforce all rules within my power to maintain control of the game.

That way, in my report, I will have the numbers of every player who was "fighting" because the rule supports an ejection there. This isn't the NBA where we can dump them for leaving the bench. We warn both teams for having unauthorized players on the field during a live ball, after that, the rule supports an ejection.

Let's play ball.

Sounds professional to me, I would have to agree there johnny.

Jicecone,

That is correct. You will NOT find a rule that says the umpire has authority to end a game because a fight took place or because he feels like it.

However, you WILL find a rule that says a player who leaves his position or bench "...for the purpose of fighting or physical confrontation..." is to be ejected.

You will also find a rule that says if a team is unable to field 8 players, the game is forfeit.

I agree with your assertion (I think), but ejecting players because they violated a rule that calls for an ejection penalty, as is the case here, is an entirely different matter.

JM

I see the rule Bob referenced, but unlike basketball I would not penalize unless someone actually made contact with someone.

The reason is that you might not have enough players to play.

The coaches bear the brunt of the players actions, thus why the state should suspend them or put them on probation along with their teams.

If this was a playoff game, there would probably be state representation at the game thus they would be able to handle it at the site.

Don't know where this was, but I don't see that happening in our area. We have some incredible rivalries, and some great games, but I've never had a problem with kids leaving the bench, even when there was a dirty play or two players jawing etc,.

Our coaches just handle the players very well. Now summer league, anything goes ... (g).

Thanks
David

johnny,

While this isn't the NBA, we certainly CAN dump them for leaving the bench to participate in a fight/physical confrontation. The pertinent rule is not 3-3-1a or j, it's 3-3-1q.

In this case, after the rule-prescribed ejections, there would not have been enough participants left to "Play Ball".

JM

David- why would someone have to make contact? If they don't have enough players to play, then that's the coach's/school's/administration's problem for not having control of their team!

-Josh

I agree and certainly would not limit myself , JUST to make sure a game continues either.

Simply leaving the bench may or may not be participating in a fight though.

As I said, I will be writing down numbers on my lineup card of offenders who are participating in the fight/physical confrontation. Simply leaving the bench (unless they were previously warned for leaving the bench during a live ball) we can eject. The MC call doesn't appear to be made yet so the ball is not yet dead so we have that rule in there to support us as well. Please understand, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but if we end up having to forfeit this game, every ejection needs to be supported by a rule...do you feel that simply leaving the bench here is ground to eject?

"3.3.1 SITUATION JJ: R1 slides hard into F4. R1 and F4 begin pushing each other. F6 and the on-deck batter run to second base to break up the fight. RULING: All are ejected. Once F6 and the on-deck batter left their positions and advanced toward the fight, they were in violation of the rule."

The case play makes this situation very clear. Once the players leave the bench(es) or their positions on the field, they are ejected!

johnny,

Any player who left his position or bench to participate in this melee is unequivocally in violation of a rule (3-1-1q) that mandates ejection - no "warning" necessary.

You also might want to read the Case Play Bob J. cited (3.31JJ) which makes it perfectly clear that David B.'s "unless they make contact" criteria is utter nonsense and clearly at odds with FED's intentions in adjudication of situations such as this.

JM

in that sitch, the case play seems to support a bunch of EJ's. thx for posting.

as you can see, jdmara kindly posted the case play you're referencing. based upon that case play, I agree with those who would eject all who left their position to gain distance toward the confrontation/fight. that pretty much sums it up for me.

This interpretation also makes the ruling similar as football and basketball, which I think is something that the Fed wants in this situation.

Not just FED: many state associations (including mine) want these rules enforced.

Good point. I guess my post was comparing the Federation rules and their intent between various sports.

I got MC on runner and catcher.

My report on the double forfeit would read "it is impossible for me to provide all the numbers of both teams who left the bench to participate in this altercation, suffice to say that nearly all players on both teams left their benches and came onto the playing field."

In my state it takes 6 ejections for a team to be disqualified from playoffs for one year, and the 6 can happen in one game, so these teams would be done.

Did this film go to the Texas State High School Athletic Association? What did they rule? If they agreed with how the umpires handled this, then they do not care to enforce the player leaving the bench rule which seems to be in conflict with what everyone says the FED does care about in these situations.

If they saw the film and thought the game should be a double forfeit and overruled the umpires who continued to play like a pro game, then the State and the FED would have spoken that they wanted the player leaving the bench rule enforced and therefore without enough players left to play, the umpires could now call a double forfeit in the future.

How the State and Fed step to the plate on these instances, tells the umpires how to step up in these instances.

Since this was in 2008, how did the State say to handle this in 2009?

This incident will almost certainly create a point of emphasis in next year's rules meetings.

I agree with DG, and disagree with Johnnyg08....no way you're gonna get the numbers of the participants in this brawl...better look at the bench and see who is left....Then forfeit for a lack of legal playing personnel....You are much better than me to get the numbers down in this situation.

I also think you've got your priorities mixed up, if you're trying to write numbers down when you should be separating kids, and stopping the fight...no time for writing.....IMHO

No, you're being smart. Very little good can come of less than a handful of people attempting to separate a mass of this size.

yep, I'm not losing a tooth or blowing out my knee trying to stop a bunch of kids from fighting...in my mind, that's not part of the job.

Disagree....As a parent, if you do nothing other than save my kid some serious injury (not an ***-kicking, but serious), I would be grateful....If some video camera catches you writing, instead of separating--at least, trying to separate--than I think you have problems....And as I said, you're not going to be effective writing down numbers in this brawl...just busy work...

You're not going to be effective attempting to break up a brawl, unless you use adequate force to incapacitate the participants. You also run the risk of being attacked yourself.

What's a video camera have to do with this, anyway? Are you implying the risk of a lawsuit? It's not going to be successful.

No way, not ever
 

No way on earth do I put my hands on a kid. Never, ever, ever.

I could get injured, the kid could get injured. No way...I would never even consider it.

Joe in Missouri

And you would not be handling it the way my state wants it done, mixed up priorities or not. We are told to stay out of the fray, and take down numbers, even if it's the numbers of players who remained where they belong.
Speaking just for myself, I'm not getting in the middle of a fight between HS kids. Kids these days are far too big and strong for me to want one to turn on me, even accidentally. I don't make my living umpiring baseball, and I won't sacrifice my family's standard of living by being injured doing something I shouldn't. Plus, as Mr. Washburn said before me, there's no way I'm putting my hands on someone else's son.

There's the problem. You're thinking like a parent, whereas we understand how to perform like an umpire.

Nothing good can come from physically getting involved. Our job is, to the best of our ability, record the violators.

No way. We are taught not to touch any player. Write down numbers and be a good witness. Eject all those who participate or advance toward the melee. Coaches are allowed to advance to restore order. Make sure Police are notified!

Well, I can't disagree with you all...but I am NOT thinking as a parent, and that's my problem...I'm thinking as a 32-year cop....trying to establish some order without hands on (I agree with that), but you're right....too much cop trying to establish order...better to back off and sort it out long distance....
Whew! That's hard for me to do.....

But in basketball we don't eject everyone that leaves the benches. There is a specific rule in the books how to handle it. That is what I'm thinking on this type of play.

I've had a brawl situation in basketball, we restored order, awarded the T's and continued with no further incident.

That seems to be what they did here and I think that is one good way to handle it.

I could be wrong, and I'm sure FED probably needs to address this for the future like they have in basketball.

Thansk
David

Sorry, I guess I misinterpreted a previous post in this thread. I did not mean that the game ended immediately but that all players leaving their position were ejected for fighting.

In football, any player that leaves the team area during a fight is disqualified. They don't have to actually participate, just leave the team box. I thought it was similar in basketball that any play leaving the bench during a fight is ejected.

I'm not so sure that's why you thought you did...because I know I didn't have the same thought as you. I think you were probably thinking as a parent, as you initially stated.

I must have not been thinking but I misspoke above, everyone that leaves the bench is ejected in basketball. Don't know where I got that from.

Sorry for the confusion.

Thanks
DAvid

These two posts are spot on.

Step back and take numbers - either the ones on the field or the ones left on the bench. Eject the offenders and go from there. Nothing good comes from touching a kid in a fight.

After a quick search, I now remember reading this thread in the basketball forum. http://forum.officiating.com/basketb...-scenario.html

Is it no longer correct to eject players leaving the bench that do not participate?

Edit: Never mind, you snuck a reply in on me while I was still writing mine. :)

Sorry for discussing basketball and football here, but I think it is worth exploring to see if the Fed has similar thinking in similar situations in other sports.

In general, trying to compare sports is a mistake. Remember that "FED" is a committee of committees. There is no expectation of consistency across every sport, except at the most abstract level (every sport emphasizes "safety," for example, but that means something very different in volleyball and football).

The rules committees for different sports do not get together and consult about whether everyone who leaves the bench during a fight is ejected.

wrong

[QUOTE=Bishopcolle;603720]Well, I can't disagree with you all...but I am NOT thinking as a parent, and that's my problem...I'm thinking as a 32-year cop....trying to establish some order without hands on (I agree with that), but you're right....too much cop trying to establish order...better to back off and sort it out long distance....
Whew! That's hard for me to do.....[/QUOTE

I'm a cop too, however my dept says off duty the only REQUIREMENT is to call 911.If I decide to take action I run the risk of civil liability and a possible IA complaint. Also I rarely do games in the jurisdiction I work. Therefore if I would write down numbers, don't touch anyone, ensure the ON DUTY Police are called, make ejections, be a good witness, That way I make my assoc. and department happy!
Old motto from an old timer cop. "If you put your hands on someone, lock them up"!

You couldn't be more wrong about that.

Sure, you SAY right now that you would be grateful. And then, if/when your kid got a bruise from where the umpire slung him out of the way, you'd be squawking about "pain and suffering," and hiring a lawyer. And if you personally wouldn't, I guarantee there are those out there that would.

(Remember, all non-umpire attendees at a baseball game are our friends, until something goes against them.)

The fighters at that game have coaches - they're the ones that can step in and get hit, or take the wrath of the helicopter parents. You take numbers, since you're writing the report after the game - a legal document, remember.

Leave the bench area, leave the game. Simple as that. I'm not getting involved; only bad things can happen in a lawsuit-happy no sense society. The only way I step in is if someone gets hurt and can't defend themselves and is in immediate danger. Then I'm doing what I can to get that individual to safety.

Thanks heaven I haven't had to deal with this kind of noise.

It's easy! You're hang-up is your badge! That is what allows you do become "involved" in an altercation. Umpires are officials but not police. We cannot become involved with the altercation once it starts. We can try and prevent it, but once it starts, the law is not with us if we get involved.

Example: Police officer grabs Player1 by the arm and Player2 punches Player1 in the face breaking his jaw. The officer is not sued for holding the arm of Player1. We as sports officials would be.

I always found that pulling my off duty weapon out of my spare ball bag and firing a warning shot was very effective.... (at least it worked for me ;))

I didn't realize that Galco made holster/ball-bags. Can you post a review when you have spare couple of minutes. :D

[QUOTE=JR12;603772]I agree....just indicated that it's hard to shut down certain feelings and trainings....From one Blue to another....

Well said....good points....

A coach's viewpoint
 

As a coach with whom several of you often disagree, here's my take. One of my kids asked me in jest this year, "Coach, what would you do if we brawl?" My answer was clear and not in jest: "I'd pull all of you off the field and we'd forfeit." Don't care what rule's cited, or what might start it, we'd be done, and it wouldn't take an umpire to make the decision for me.

Good!

I think there are probably a handful of coaches who would do the same thing.

But, the umpires HAVE to do what they are supposed to do, as well!

Joe In Missouri

And for every coach like this, there is a hundred that would kick, scream, claw, fight and whine when the game was forfeited by rule.

Flash bangs are even better.

Did everyone notice that the catcher actually slammed his hockey-style catcher's mask into the runner on the ground? What a goon.