A.D. problems

[Brett]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

He's the official representative of the school.

Good for him. That and $.99 will get him a dollar menu fry.

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

I said he has [sole] authority over the use of the field.

Based on the laws in what jurisdiction?

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Brett

Based on the laws in what jurisdiction?

If it's at his school, pretty much all of them.

Whether the state HS association has granted the ability for a unilateral decision by an AD to terminate a game held on his grounds is different from whether he has the legal authority to do so.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by Brett

Good for him. That and $.99 will get him a dollar menu fry.



Based on the laws in what jurisdiction?

You added the [sole] to my post. Very bad form.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by Brett

Good for him. That and $.99 will get him a dollar menu fry.

Betcha that menu fry that if you need someone for crowd control you'll think he IS the offfical rep of the school.

Can't have it both ways.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

In general, the UIC/PU is in control of the diamond, BUT, the situation we are discussing has nothing to do with the general rules of baseball. It has to do with a school official and his jurisdiction with regard to the field conditions.

99.9999999999...........................% of the time, when the umpires use their good judgement and notify the proper school authority to fix a problem on the field that causes a safety hazard, the school authority or coach will complain that you are the first umpires that have made an issue about the alleged problem. But in the case being discussed, the AD is being proactive with regard to the condition of the field and is using his position as the home school representative, to insure that the safety of the players come first. As I have stated in an earlier post, take your game fee check and take your wife/girl friend/mistress (or all three) out to a nice dinner and be thankful for this AD.

MTD, Sr.

[dash_riprock]

A friend of mine ejected the AD from a basketball game and directed security to escort him from the court. They complied. The AD can tell the coaches what to do, but not the officials. Dump the AD if you have to.

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

A friend of mine ejected the AD from a basketball game and directed security to escort him from the court. They complied. The AD can tell the coaches what to do, but not the officials. Dump the AD if you have to.

Absolutely correct, if the AD is trying to be an idiot.

In this case, however, he was acting properly and looking out for the students and I would not argue with him at all.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

Absolutely correct, if the AD is trying to be an idiot.

In this case, however, he was acting properly and looking out for the students and I would not argue with him at all.

Nor would I. But the notion that the AD has any authority over a baseball game in progress is ridiculous. He has the same authority as an assistant coach - none.

[GA Umpire]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

Nor would I. But the notion that the AD has any authority over a baseball game in progress is ridiculous. He has the same authority as an assistant coach - none.

Which again comes back to a previous post. AD tried to stop the game and the umpire told him no. All he did was go pout in a corner until the umpire called the game. Some authority. Or, at least, impressive way to show it. Don't you think?

[PeteBooth]

Steve for the most part I agree HOWEVER, it might be semantics but there is a distinction between officials being in charge of the GAME and in charge of a FIELD.

I once did a night game (no curfew at least to my or my partner's knowledge nor to the particpants). We were in the top half of nine (men's league game) in a close ball game.

It was 11PM and all of a sudden the superintendent of the field we were playing on said - GAME OVER right then and there. In fact we no sooner got off the field and the lights were turned off.

The point is the Decision to continue or stop a game is OURS HOWEVER, the FIELD per say is not ours. If someone OWNS the field and they say GAME OVER = GAME OVER.

The STATUS of that game is now in the hands of the "powers to be"

Same is pretty much true in MLB. It's not until a League OFFICIAL gets involved that the game is cancelled etc. We have seen some pretty horrific conditions in MLB and the game continued. The Montreal Expos / Dodger series many years back when it was snowing comes to mind.

Pete Booth

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

It was 11PM and all of a sudden the superintendent of the field we were playing on said - GAME OVER right then and there. In fact we no sooner got off the field and the lights were turned off.

The point is the Decision to continue or stop a game is OURS HOWEVER, the FIELD per say is not ours. If someone OWNS the field and they say GAME OVER = GAME OVER.

The STATUS of that game is now in the hands of the "powers to be"

And my point is that the AD does not "own" the field unless his name is on the title deed. He is but a glorified employee of the school. ADs have never intimidated nor particularly impressed me one iota. Now, the "superintendent of the field" would be a different story, but the AD is not the superintendent.

[Brett]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

You added the [sole] to my post. Very bad form.

Had I added it without calling attention to the fact that is was added editorially (with the brackets) for clarification to the point you were trying to make, I'd agree with you. It's common practice when quoting someone to add or modify words when necessary to give context to a quote without the surrounding context of the original quote or to help the flow of the sentence. Don't like it? Too bad.

[Brett]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

But in the case being discussed, the AD is being proactive with regard to the condition of the field and is using his position as the home school representative, to insure that the safety of the players come first.

Which case are you discussing? The OP stated the umpire got the feeling that the AD was trying to get home because it was "only" a FROSH doubleheader.

If what you're stating were the case, I'd whole heartedly agree with you.

If what the OP thought was correct and the AD was trying to cheat the players out of a double header because he wanted to get home, shame on him.

I usually work with "game management" an give their input quite a bit of weight when it comes to matters like this. However, when I get the sense that adults are putting their interests ahead of the interests of the child players involved; I have no problem taking a stand. If the AD wants to go home that bad, he can pull his team and forfeit both games.

[BrookstheUmp]

I would have a problem with the AD butting in in this situation. Now if there was a nasty thunderstorm on the way, i could understand. Let's not forget, this is about field conditions. Once the game starts, the umpires are the SOLE authority as to whether conditions are fit to play. The umpires are in charge of the game, not the AD.

[umpjong]

Its the A.D. that has to explain the early end of the contest. If I got my check, bye bye.... Why the pissing match? Let him be the big shot............