The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 10, 2009, 10:19am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,057
Send a message via Yahoo to UmpJM
Cool

Kevin,

What does your association make of the Official FED Interp that says:

Quote:
The umpire should play a scheduled game where no authenticated baseballs are available and then report the game to the state association.
Because it seems to me that your association's policy to NOT allow the game without "marked" baseballs is in direct contradiction to "the NFHS edict on the baseballs".

JM
__________________
Finally, be courteous, impartial and firm, and so compel respect from all.
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 10, 2009, 10:43am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM) View Post
Kevin,

What does your association make of the Official FED Interp that says:



Because it seems to me that your association's policy to NOT allow the game without "marked" baseballs is in direct contradiction to "the NFHS edict on the baseballs".

JM
JM, This was last year; this year may be different. I have rapport with one of the wheels, and I was going to bring it up to him after you mentioned this and the comments started flowing. I only know of one of the umpires that refused to play a game for this reason, but I heard that there were a few.

It's really preposterous. These kids bust their @sses all week to play these games. And many of their folks bust theirs to get off work (like we do) and get to their son's game. All so some umpire can refuse to allow the game to be played because of incorrect baseballs?!? This whole deal that we pull off is already difficult enough, and in many cases, ridiculous enough that we don't have to make it any more difficult or ridiculous with crap like this.
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 10, 2009, 02:36pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chasing the dream
Posts: 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty View Post
JM, This was last year; this year may be different.
i believe the comment JM references was in last year's book as well.
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 10, 2009, 05:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,895
Next year, [follow closely] they [the leadership of the unit] may choose to enforce it differently than they did this year.
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 10, 2009, 07:27pm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lakeside, California
Posts: 6,724
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty View Post
Next year, [follow closely] they [the leadership of the unit] may choose to enforce it differently than they did this year.
It's really a shame that you have to explain the meaning of what you say to certain people who choose to pick apart what you write.
__________________
Matthew 15:14, 1 Corinthians 1:23-25
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 10, 2009, 07:51pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,057
Send a message via Yahoo to UmpJM
Cool

Thanks to all who chose to respond.

My post here was prompted by a discussion on another thread with a gentleman who was certain that it was grounds for forfeit to not have properly marked balls available.

I had never heard that before and disagreed.

I was curious how it was handled in different parts of the country. Between the two threads, 20 different posters took a position (including me).

4 said you can't play without them. Only one that it was grounds for a forfeit. The other 3 said they'd have/find a way to get marked balls.

Everybody else said "play", with some suggesting "file a report". 2 of the "don't play" umpires are from the LA area, &, I suspect, may belong to the same association. Another from NC & one from MN.

The FED Interpretation I posted above I found in the BRD. The BRD references the NFHS News, 3/99 #20. Apparently, this was in anticipation of the "Mark" requirement entering the rule book in 2000.

Sounds to me like the "official" FED position is, play the game, report it. Makes perfect sense to me.

JM
__________________
Finally, be courteous, impartial and firm, and so compel respect from all.
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 10, 2009, 08:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chasing the dream
Posts: 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM) View Post

Sounds to me like the "official" FED position is, play the game, report it. Makes perfect sense to me.

JM
FED, at least as represented by Elliot Hopkins, agrees with you. It's too bad some umpires and some assigners actually put a logo above the game. Since relocating to Southern California I'ver run into some real anal types, but I haven't had the experience with an assigner that Larry has had.

Last edited by Ump153; Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 10:43pm.
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 11, 2009, 07:26am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM) View Post

Sounds to me like the "official" FED position is, play the game, report it. Makes perfect sense to me.

JM
In Ohio, the state baseball philosophy is: "do what you can to get the game in." Between bad weather, fields that aren't ready, and other factors beyond our control, ignoring the mark on the baseball is something clearly within our power.

Consistent with that principle, we, too, are instructed to play the game and report the infraction. Most umpires I know do at least half of that.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Closed Thread

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ABC's "Nightline" examines "worst calls ever" tonight pizanno Basketball 27 Fri Jul 04, 2008 06:08am
"Hideout" Play--Legal or Not? reff4e Football 10 Mon Nov 26, 2007 08:28pm
New "AP Legal Touch" Rule/Different Interpretation BayStateRef Basketball 142 Wed Jul 18, 2007 10:53pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:43am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1