Restricted to dugout?
 

I have seen this play a few times in the last few years at the FED level so in MN that typically means 10th grade - 12th grade "varsity" players where B/R will step on F3's foot while running to 1B. The easy no-call is if F3's foot is in the middle of 1B and he gets stepped on.

The trickier one is when F3's foot is where it's supposed to be and he gets stepped on.

What do you watch for and assuming F3's foot is where it is supposed to be, have you ever called the B/R for anything? I played a lot of baseball in my day and I've never/ever stepped on F3's foot even one time. So while I have never called anything in the times I've seen it, I want to know who has called it and how you dealt with the offensive coach and afterward if you'd call it again?

Thanks guys,
John

johnny,

I don't believe I've ever witnessed this in a game.

If I did, and I believed the runner's action intentional, I would bang and toss him for MC in a NY minute.

JM

P.S. Why is your post titled "Restricted to dugout?"

Well, I titled it that way since while we might not be able to judge MC, maybe we could restrict him, teach the rest of the team a lesson and save the player from a 1 game suspension in MN. Thanks for your reply.

Unless you are 150% sure that it is intentional, and I am not even sure you can even tell then, don"t go there.

I have seen players take that last leap and have no idea where they were going to land but, were just trying to get to first. God bless the player that has a coach that teachs him how to play first base.

If the B/R's last stride has a little extra effort, i.e., trying stomp on something (a foot).
Had it happen once and luckily the kid missed. One team back home was notorious for trying. That coach didn't last long.

Intent=Ejection

Pretty simple.

You don't restrict players in FED. You either eject them or you don't.

Which rule permits you to restrict a legal player to the dugout?

Illegal players and subs are out and restricted, but restriction is never a penalty applied to a player who is in the game legally. See 2-27.

Depending on how many coaches there are, you may have to restrict a player rather than ejecting them. Even an ejected player must be under school approved adult supervision so if there is no one to "supervise" the player outside the field (on the bus), he might have to stay in the dugout. Here in CT, even mommy or daddy cannot supervise the ejected student unless with the coach's approval, mommy or daddy take junior home.

Let's take a breath:
 

Prior to 2010 it was impossible to "restrict" a player. The only difference was when a player is ejected he can be required to stay in the dugout to be supervised.

According to the NFHS Rules Committee the safety of the player is more important than the philosophy that the ejected person be out of sight and out of mind.

Starting with 2010 the Rules Committee is reviewing the possibility that "restriction" of a probably concussed player (that a coach refuses to remove from the contest) is under certain circumstances the correct path.

While restriction of players is not yet a tool for the umpires game managment bag it is slowly reaching the discussion stages at the NFHS National Meetings.

Regards,

Dammit, Tim! I'm an umpire, not a doctor! ;)

It's not our job to "save" the player from anything. And, even if he stays in the dugout, it's still an ejection.

If it's clearly an accident, treat it as such. If it's clearly as intentional, eject and MC. If you can't tell, address it so both teams know you saw it. An "accident" won't happen again.

In the spirit of discussion...it appears as though the rule does give us some latitude for what we might judge "minor" infractions to restrict a player to the dugout.

behavior in any manner not in accordance with the spirit of fair play

Other things that give us an opportunity to "restrict"

For discovery of an illegal player (2-36-3) on offense by an umpire or either team, that player shall be called out and restricted to the bench/dugout for the duration of the game.

An illegal player discovered on defense shall be restricted to the bench/dugout for the duration of the game.

A coach, player, substitute, attendant or other bench personnel shall not:

g. commit any unsportsmanlike act to include, but not limited to,

1. use of words or actions to incite or attempt to incite spectators
demonstrations,

2. use of profanity, intimidation tactics, remarks reflecting unfavorably
upon any other person, or taunting or baiting. The NFHS disapproves of any form of taunting that is intended or designed to embarrass, ridicule or demean others under circumstances including race, reli- gion, gender or national origin.

3. use of any language intended to intimidate,

4. behavior in any manner not in accordance with the spirit of fair play;

5. be in live ball territory (excluding team’s bullpen area) during the opponent’s infield practice prior to the start of the game.

6. any member of the coaching staff who was not the head coach (or designee) in 3-2-4 leaves the vicinity of the dugout or coaching box to
dispute a judgment call by an umpire.

For violation of g (6), both the head coach and the offend-
ing coach shall be restricted to the dugout for the remainder of the game, or if the offense is judged severe enough, the umpire may eject the offender and
restrict or eject the head coach.

So it looks like based on my OP, the option we have is a "warn" then eject if we can't prove malicious contact if B/R steps on F3's foot that is in the proper place on 1B. It does not appear (as others pointed out, "thank you") that we have a "restrict to the dugout" option on this type of play.

I don't have to "prove" MC..... it's MC if I call it!

Hmmm,
 

We teach in Oregon MC is dictated by one of two actions:

1) Is the player trying to dislodge the ball from the fielder,
2) Is the player trying to injure the fielder?

All other activities that include contact are just "baseball."

Works pretty well in our state.

Regards,