The Official Forum  

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Apr 20, 2010, 01:53pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadioBlue View Post
Meanwhile, back at the original post ...


Just to summarize so everybody is clear ... an ejection/restriction of a HC has no bearing on any ACs.
Correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RadioBlue View Post
If an AC leaves their position or dugout to argue a call, eject the AC and restrict the HC. That would not preclude a different AC from occupying a coaches' box, correct?
Not correct. You MAY choose to restrict the AC, which also REQUIRES restriction of the head-coach. Correct: a different AC may then occupy the coaches box vacated by the restricted/ejected AC or HC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RadioBlue View Post
There's no requirement that either of the coaches' boxes be occupied by a coach. They may be occupied by players, non-restricted/ejected coaches or left empty.
Correct.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Apr 20, 2010, 02:04pm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by cviverito View Post
Not correct. You MAY choose to restrict the AC, which also REQUIRES restriction of the head-coach. Correct: a different AC may then occupy the coaches box vacated by the restricted/ejected AC or HC.
Right. Good catch. (I wish you'd knew what I meant instead of what I said.)
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Apr 20, 2010, 03:57pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
Quote: "I believe that the intent of the rule was to restrict actions above what the plays suggest"

May I suggest that you contact your State Rules Committee and get clarification on this issue. As umpires, we must be careful when enforcing rules based on what we believe the "intent" to be is. And when we come to certain rules, as the one which you have mentioned, we ask those in charge to clarify since this forum has not served that purpose for you.

Good luck...
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Apr 20, 2010, 07:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 2,439
Angry

You know, I did a cut & paste from the 2010 FED book so you could all read the rule and the penalty. You are supposed to be umpires and most of you HS umpires. I cannot believe how plain English can be debated so.

People, if you do not understand this rule, this rule that for once the FED put in plain English, don't debate it. Stop umpiring HS ball, turn in your uniforms and find another hobby that you can screw up!

Finis
__________________
When in doubt, bang 'em out!
Ozzy
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Apr 20, 2010, 08:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY state
Posts: 1,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzy6900 View Post
People, if you do not understand this rule, this rule that for once the FED put in plain English, don't debate it. Stop umpiring HS ball, turn in your uniforms and find another hobby that you can screw up!

Finis
I think Illinois would survive the loss.
Reply With Quote
Reply

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
Coaches on field- live ball foul? bossman72 Football 6 Tue Oct 31, 2006 12:34pm
Coaches on the field Ran.D Softball 2 Tue May 09, 2006 09:05am
Coaches on the field during a game alabamabluezebra Football 9 Wed Aug 24, 2005 07:09am
Field goal attempts that hit the cameras on field goal posts Barney72 Football 3 Tue Oct 12, 2004 12:21pm
Coaches on the Field Ed Hickland Football 32 Wed Dec 18, 2002 02:11pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:30pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1